Election within 90 days is duty, not choice: CJP

LAHORE: The Consti­tution calls for elections within 90 days after the assemblies are dissolved and leaves no choice for a delay, Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial said on Sunday, as the judiciary and the government continue to lock horns over when polls should be held in Punjab.

“When it comes to constitutional enforcement, we must not blink our eyes,” Justice Bandial said at a conference on minority rights in Lahore. “If it says 90 days for holding elections, it is our duty to say that and not our choice, instead of finding a reason why we should avoid saying that.”

His remarks follow an order by the Supreme Court asking the government to hold elections in Punjab on May 14 — a delay of one month from the Constitution-mandated time, as the provincial assembly was dissolved in mid-January.

And a further delay is possible if the government and the opposition PTI manage to reach a consensus. An earlier round of talks produced no results.

For now, the government is still baulking at the idea of holding polls in one or two provinces before the general election and wants simultaneous voting across the country, sometime in October.

This has been vehemently opposed by the PTI and it petitioned the Supreme Court, which is set to resume a hearing in the case on Monday (today).

In his address, Justice Bandial regretted that the matter was being called a “controversy”. He said: “I’m sorry, I’m not worthy of controversy.”

And as the PTI has started rallies in solidarity with the chief justice, Justice Bandial told the audience: “Please don’t say that you support us. I’m just one of the members of the Supreme Court. You must support the Supreme Court if you stand up for the law and the Constitution and not [for] any individual.”

He said the Supreme Court and its judges had no existence individually but “as a unit [and] as a constitutional organ and that is how we function”.

“The important thing is when the Supreme Court speaks on merit, then its judgement has moral authority. That becomes even more important when those judgements are not appealed or no review is filed, then that means no one has any objection to the judgement.

“If a review is filed, then it will be heard because no judgement is binding unless it becomes final. But if a judgement is not challenged, then it becomes final, so let’s see what happens now,” he said

The chief justice said he was “optimistic” that the nation’s leaders, institutions and people were all “committed to the Constitution”.

Referring to negotiations between the government and the PTI, he said the apex court was informed that they had yet to conclude.

“We have nothing to do with that, but at least they are conscious that they have a duty to comply [with] the Constitution and we are there to support that effort otherwise our judgement is there, it has a force of its own, it may not be implemented today but it will last to the test of time and shall be implemented tomorrow,” he said.

Minority rights

Earlier, speaking on the event’s theme, Justice Bandial paid tribute to Justice Alvin Robert Cornelius, who served as the chief justice of Pakistan from 1960 to 1968.

He said Justice Cornelius gave 17 years to the Supreme Court and his life was an example for the judges because when he retired, he had no assets in the country.

Recalling some of Justice Cornelius’ famous decisions, Justice Bandial said the late judge declared the governor general’s dissolution of the assembly as illegal, arguing that the executive officer could not decide the fundamental rights.

Similarly, when two provinces banned Jamaat-i-Islami in 1964, Justice Cornelius lifted the ban, saying it was a matter of basic human rights, Justice Bandial said.

Justice Bandial told participants that the Constitution assured freedom to profess religion and manage religious institutions subject to public order and morality.

“Our Constitution in Article 21 safeguards against the taxation of any particular religion. So, for no particular reason can other religions be taxed,” he said. “Article 22 safeguards educational institutions in respect of religion. No religious instruction or ceremony in any educational institution other than one’s own religion.”

The chief justice added that no citizen could be denied admission to educational institutions, which received aid from public revenues, on the grounds of caste, race, religion, or place of birth.

“Our Constitution says everyone is free to profess their religion, and all citizens have equal rights and yet for years our minorities have felt discriminated, marginalised and sidelined,” he said.