Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) Vice President Maryam Nawaz has said that the party will not accept “one-sided” decisions of the Supreme Court, after the top court allowed party leader Hamza Shahbaz to remain as a “trustee” Punjab chief minister till Monday.
Earlier on Friday, Punjab Assembly Deputy Speaker Dost Mohammad Mazari had declared Hamza winner of the chief minister’s election after rejecting 10 votes of the PML-Q lawmakers, citing party head Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain’s letter, instructing party members to cast their votes in favour of Hamza.
Today, a three-member bench of the top court, comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Munib Akhter, heard the petition of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) candidate and PML-Q leader Parvez Elahi against Hamza’s victory in the election.
The court said that Hamza would work in accordance with the law and the Constitution until the next hearing on Monday, adding that the PML-N leader is not allowed to use his power as chief minister in any way that would benefit him personally.
Responding to the court’s interim order, Maryam tweeted: “Amid pressure due to bullying, threats, misbehaviour and abuses, if the house of justice makes specific decisions via the same bench and negates itself, negate its own decisions, puts its weight behind a single side then do not expect us to bow our heads before such one-sided decisions. Enough is enough!”
اگر انصاف کے ایوان بھی دھونس، دھمکی،بدتمیزی اور گالیوں کےدباؤ میں آ کر بار بار ایک ہی بنچ کے ذریعے مخصوص فیصلے کرتےہیں،اپنے ہی دیے فیصلوں کی نفی کرتے ہیں،سارا وزن ترازو کے ایک ہی پلڑے میں ڈال دیتے ہیں تو ایسے یکطرفہ فیصلوں کے سامنے سر جھکانے کی توقع ہم سے نا رکھی جائے۔بہت ہو گیا!
— Maryam Nawaz Sharif (@MaryamNSharif) July 23, 2022
She said that the current political instability started with the apex court’s decision on Article 63-A, adding that it made an “arbitrary interpretation” of the Constitution to not count the MPAs that voted voluntarily.
“Today, a new interpretation is being made [of the decision]. So that the same favourite, who took benefit from it earlier, could take benefit again! Disapproved!”
