“Supreme Court’s Ruling Illuminates Alvi’s Negligence and Actions”

“Supreme Court Emphasizes President Arif Alvi’s Oversight and Actions in Election Date Issue”

In a detailed written judgment penned by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, the Supreme Court has addressed President Arif Alvi’s role in setting the date for elections and the context of the delay in elections due to errors, misjudgments, and violations. The judgment highlights the following key points:

President’s Constitutional Duty: The judgment emphasizes that when the National Assembly was dissolved in August, President Arif Alvi was required to “appoint a date, not later than ninety days from the date of the dissolution, for the holding of a general election to the assembly.” However, the president did not fulfill this duty.

Delay Due to Census: The delay in holding the 7th Census and the subsequent delay in notifying it contributed to the postponement of the delimitation exercise, which is crucial for elections. The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) now aims to complete the delimitation by the end of the month.

Over-Action and Inaction: The judgment discusses the president’s over-action and inaction in discharging his constitutional duties. It takes note of the president’s use of social media to inquire about the election date, questioning whether a country can be run based on social media messaging.

Legal Avenue for Seeking Advice: The court emphasizes that the only permissible manner for the president to seek the Supreme Court’s opinion was by invoking Article 186 of the constitution. This article allows the president to refer questions of law to the Supreme Court for consideration.

Constitutional Disregard: The judgment points out that President Arif Alvi had dissolved the National Assembly when a vote of no-confidence against the former prime minister, Imran Khan, was impending in April of the previous year. This act was not within the president’s powers, leading to a constitutional crisis.

Consequences for Constitutional Violations: The judgment refers to a judge’s statement in 2022, which highlighted the violation of constitutional authority by several officeholders. It suggests that there should be consequences for such violations of the constitution.

Adherence to the Constitution: The judgment underscores the importance of constitutional officeholders adhering to the constitution. It also emphasizes that general elections must be held when they are due.

The Supreme Court’s ruling brings attention to the president’s role in the election date issue and highlights the need for adherence to the constitution and the proper exercise of constitutional powers.