End of Imran Khan innings

Imran Khan was de-notified from the office of the prime minister of Pakistan on Sunday.

The country's Cabinet Division issued a notification in this regard after the dissolution of the National Assembly.

Khan can remain in office for at least 15 days till a caretaker prime minister is appointed under Article 224, The News reported. 

Embattled world leaders around the world – and there are plenty at the moment – will be looking towards Pakistan, wondering if they should also take a leaf out of Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan's playbook.

On Sunday, all eyes were on the South Asian country with its prime minister set to face a no-confidence motion moved by a unified coalition opposition. If the no-confidence motion were to pass – and it seemed that it would – then Khan and his entire government would have to resign. It would also be a damning indictment of the National Assembly's lack of faith in the ruling government.

Speaking to CNBC, Information Minister Fawad Chaudhury said the government did not expect to survive a no-confidence vote.

But before such an impeachment came to fruition, Khan pulled out the aces up his sleeve – manufacturing the dismissal of the motion, dissolving the Parliament and in turn calling for snap elections.

This instantly prompted Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial to take a suo motu notice of the political situation in the country, Geo News reported, adding the development came after opposition leaders demanded to review the "unconstitutional" ruling by National Assembly Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri.

The Supreme Court then barred all state institutions from taking any "extra-constitutional" steps.

A three judge bench of the apex court led by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Bandial and with Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar heard the matter.

The top court, after issuing notices to the attorney general of Pakistan and others on the matter, adjourned the hearing till Monday and directed the AGP to determine the constitutionality of the NA speaker's ruling.

According to Deputy Speaker Suri, he has done no wrong. Suri dismissed the no-confidence motion, terming it a violation of Article 5 of the Constitution, the Dawn reported.

His ruling was in response to a question raised by Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry, who said that loyalty to the state was the basic duty of every citizen under Article 5 of the Constitution.

This spirit of loyalty and its betrayal squarely hinged on claims by PM Khan that a foreign conspiracy had been hatched to oust the government.

In response, Suri said, "No foreign power shall be allowed to topple an elected government through a conspiracy," adding that the points raised by the minister were "valid" and thus were grounds for dismissal of the motion. The session was later prorogued.

Treasonous times

Ahsan Bhoon, president of the Supreme Court Bar, told the Economic Times that the actions of the prime minister and deputy speaker were against the constitution and "they should be prosecuted for treason under Article 6 of the constitution."

With the SC taking note of the situation, a charge of treason against Khan is a real possibility.

Article 6 of Pakistan's Constitution says that any person who "abrogates or subverts or suspends or holds in abeyance, or attempts or conspires to abrogate or subvert or suspend or hold in abeyance, the Constitution by use of force or show of force or by any other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason."

The second clause adds that any person aiding, abetting or collaborating in the acts will also be considered guilty of high treason.

Another clause says that an act of high treason cannot be validated by any court, including the Supreme Court and a High Court.

Furthermore, it is the Parliament which is tasked with providing for the punishment of persons found guilty of high treason.

The first and only person to be charged with treason – and sentenced to death – was Pervez Musharraf, former military chief and president of Pakistan.

A special court delivered its verdict on the matter in 2019. At the time, however, the move was hailed as a deterrent for military coup-makers in a country which has been ruled by the army for almost half the time since its independence.

This time the case is of a civilian government.

Of rifts and fissures

A recent rift has developed between the army and Khan in the recent months. The New York Times reported that Khan lost the backing of the military, seemingly over his effort to place a loyal aide and former spy chief  in charge of the army over the objections of the top brass.

While Khan last week blamed the US for the no-confidence motion, Pakistan's army chief said the country maintained an "excellent strategic relationship with the US."

In another surprising move, Pakistan Inter-Services Public Relations Director General (DG ISPR) Major General Babar Iftikhar yesterday told media that it had nothing to do with Sunday's proceedings in the assembly, The News reported.

As for the no-confidence vote, it was a defiant Khan who addressed the nation after dissolving the Parliament.

"The public decides who they want in power," Khan, 69, told the nation in a televised address. "I want to tell the public to get ready for elections."

No-confidence motion violates the Constitution?

According to legal experts in Pakistan, it wasn't the no-confidence motion, but rather the dismissal of it which violates the Constitution.

Writing for the Dawn newspaper, Abdul Moiz Jaferii, said that the devil can cite the scripture for his cause, pointing that even if there was any foreign interference, it had to be adjudicated in the court of law.

He said this was basically "a minority government calling the majority representatives of the people traitors."

He also pointed out a precedent: "a similar controversy regarding the vote of no confidence occurred back in 1989 in the Anwar Durrani case, where the Balochistan High Court held that courts can intervene in any matter requiring the interpretation of the Constitution and held that it was mandatory to put the motion to vote before any dissolution."

Supreme Court Bar Association President Ahsan Bhoon did not mince words in this regard, calling upon everyone to take a stand against "an act of a dictator donning a civilian garb".

Shama Junejo, a political scientist, sharing a screenshot of the relevant part of the Constitution, wrote on Twitter, "[Information Minister] Fawad misinterpreted the constitution. Sub clause 2 of the article 5 demands 'obedience to the constitution' and if it is not then Article 6 being applied for high treason. Imran and the Speaker have violated the constitution. They must be charged with high treason."

A Bloomberg report also noted that an area of concern for Khan was the resignation of his deputy attorney general Raja Khalid, who termed the cancellation of the no-confidence vote a blatant violation of the Constitution.

"Imran Khan's government has made a mockery of the constitution of Pakistan, and no dictator has done to Pakistan and Pakistan's constitution what Imran Khan has done," Khalid said. "What has happened is illegal and unconstitutional."

What next?

As per the 20th Amendment of the Constitution of Pakistan – passed back in 2012 – a president no longer holds discretionary powers to appoint a caretaker prime minister or chief ministers (CM) of their preference.

The amendment instead extends the right to the prime minister and leader of the opposition in the outgoing NA, and the chief ministers and the leaders of the opposition in each outgoing provincial assembly.

The 20th Amendment also introduces Article 224A into the constitution, which ensures that in case the PM and the leader of the opposition are at an impasse about the final choice of a name for the caretaker prime minister, the matter would be taken to a parliamentary committee with an equal number of members from both sides, who will then make the final decision regarding the appointment.

A similar six-member bipartisan committee comprising members of the provincial assembly makes the decision of the caretaker CM of each province.

If these committees are unable to decide within three days, the matter is then referred to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), which is bound by law to take the decision within two days.

Once the caretaker executives are chosen, the federal and provincial caretaker cabinets are formed on the advice of the caretaker PM and CMs, respectively.

Draining the swamp

Former governor Chaudhry Muhammad Sarwar hit back at the PTI leadership soon after he was removed from office.
Sources told Geo News that the decision was taken at PML-Q leader Chaudhry Parvez Elahi's request.

The ex-governor said that when he had presented the proposal of resigning voluntarily, then why was there a need to dismiss him.
Sarwar claimed he was asked to do "unconstitutional things". 

"I asked them to not make me do illegal things…I told them that they can have me resign, but I will not do unconstitutional acts," the ex-governor said.

Minister for Information and Broadcasting Fawad Chaudhry, announcing the government's decision, said that PTI's leader Omer Sarfaraz Cheema has been appointed as the new Punjab governor.

The Punjab Assembly was set to elect either the joint opposition candidate Hamza Shehbaz or the government's ally Chaudhry Parvez Elahi to the chief minister's slot but following the decision to adjourn the NA session for an indefinite period, the Punjab Assembly session has also been adjourned till April 6.

The prized CM slot fell vacant after the resignation of Sardar Usman Buzdar following a deal between the ruling PTI and PML-Q a few days back.