Skip to content

Imran seeks review of Pakistan SC’s decision on no-confidence voting

Pakistan’s former Prime Minister Imran Khan has filed a review petition in the Supreme Court, challenging the latter’s decision on April 7 in a suo moto notice on the ruling of the then Deputy Speaker National Assembly Qasim Shah Suri to reject the no-confidence motion.


Khan, also chairman of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), has contested that Article 248 of the Constitution barred any other institution from interfering in the affairs of Parliament

He added that the ruling of the Deputy Speaker on April 3 to reject the no-confidence motion was in accordance with Article 5 of the constitution.

A five-member larger bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial had passed a unanimous judgment, declaring the events of April 3, including the Suri, that followed the dissolution of the Assembly, null and void and contrary to the Constitution .

“Article 248 did not make the applicant answerable for exercising any constitutional powers before any court. The bench erred to appreciate the provision of Articles 66, 67 and 69,” Khan’s petition maintained.

“The Apex Court has erred to appreciate the mandate of the Constitution which ensures that the Parliament as well as the members thereof, the President as well as the Prime Minister are not answerable in exercise of their functions as well as discretionary powers before any court. “

The petition stated that the Supreme Court’s suo moto notice of a matter related to Parliament is a clear violation of Article 175 of the Constitution

It further maintained that the ruling of then deputy speaker National Assembly was meant to implement Article 5 of the Constitution and had nothing to do with Khan.

“In fact, the Speaker had certified that there was no no-confidence motion pending against Imran Khan. Khan’s action to dissolve the assembly were not based on ill-motivation and were not against the Constitution.

“The Honorable Bench of the Apex Court has erred to appreciate that within the proceedings of the house, ie Parliament are sovereign, independent and are not amenable to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court or any other Court under the Constitution,” the petition said.

Khan’s petition maintains that the Supreme Court is not entitled to intervene in any decision that the Parliament makes.

The petition has urged the Supreme Court to review its decision taken on April 7 and dismiss it on the basis of the Constitution.



(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

dear reader,

Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance.
We, however, have a request.

As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Our subscription model has seen an encouraging response from many of you, who have subscribed to our online content. More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. We believe in free, fair and credible journalism. Your support through more subscriptions can help us practice the journalism to which we are committed.

Support quality journalism and subscribe to Business Standard.

Digital Publisher


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.