Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial has said that it is clear that the deputy speaker's ruling rejecting the no-confidence motion against Imran Khan was wrong, adding that the court would make its decision keeping in view the national interest. The chief justice also said that the verdict in the suo motu case about the legality of the situation aftre National Assembly deputy speaker's ruling and dissolution of the assembly would be announced today.
Further, Justice Bandial said that the problem arose when President Arif Alvi dissolved assembly on the advice of then Prime Minister Imran Khan. "The prime minister cannot dissolve assemblies during the no-confidence motion," he said.
After minutes of the meeting were presented, the court enquired if the foreign minister was also present in the meeting. Lawyer Naeem Bokhari said he was sent a notice. The court once again asked whether or not he was present in the meeting, Bokhari then answered that the FM was not present in the meeting. Upon being asked his opinion by Justice Mandokhel, Naeem Bokhari said that the foreign minister should have been present in the meeting.
Moreover, Justice Jamal Khan said that the ruling was issued by the deputy speaker, but it was signed by the speaker of the National Assembly. "Why was the ruling not signed by the deputy speaker? It appears the deputy speaker was not present in the national security committee meeting either," the judge said.
At this, Naeem Bokhari said that the documents presented are 'probably' not original.
Earlier, Justice Aijazul Hassan remarked that had the assembly not been dissolved, the House could have nullified the deputy speaker's ruling. "The prime minister took advantage of the situation and dissolved the assembly," he said.
Further, Justice Bandial said that the problem arose when President Arif Alvi dissolved assembly on the advice of then Prime Minister Imran Khan. "The prime minister cannot dissolve assemblies during the no-confidence motion," he said.
After minutes of the meeting were presented, the court enquired if the foreign minister was also present in the meeting. Lawyer Naeem Bokhari said he was sent a notice. The court once again asked whether or not he was present in the meeting, Bokhari then answered that the FM was not present in the meeting. Upon being asked his opinion by Justice Mandokhel, Naeem Bokhari said that the foreign minister should have been present in the meeting.
Moreover, Justice Jamal Khan said that the ruling was issued by the deputy speaker, but it was signed by the speaker of the National Assembly. "Why was the ruling not signed by the deputy speaker? It appears the deputy speaker was not present in the national security committee meeting either," the judge said.
At this, Naeem Bokhari said that the documents presented are 'probably' not original.
Earlier, Justice Aijazul Hassan remarked that had the assembly not been dissolved, the House could have nullified the deputy speaker's ruling. "The prime minister took advantage of the situation and dissolved the assembly," he said.