SC throws out PTI plea against Mohsin Naqvi’s appointment as Punjab CM

The Supreme Court has rejected the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) plea challenging the appointment of Mohsin Naqvi as the chief minister of Punjab, citing a number of objections including “scandalous language” used in the petition.

Former federal minister Asad Umar filed the petition that also challenged the appointments of Raja Riaz as Opposition Leader in the National Assembly and members of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

The SC registrar's office rejected the request as “not entertainable”, pointing out technical issues that nullify the petition. Reportedly, the first point of concern raised by the registrar’s office takes issue with the Article under which the petition was raised.

Under Articles 184(3), the Supreme Court can, if it considers that a question of public importance with reference to the enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights is involved, have the power to make an original jurisdiction in any dispute between any two or more governments.

The plea, the SC adds does not point out as to what questions of public importance in the instant case are involved with reference to enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights... so as to directly invoke jurisdiction of the Supreme Court” under the cited article.

“Since no other forum capable of resolving the issue had been approached and no justification was given by the PTI’s petition for evading all other forums was provided, the court was compelled to disregard the petition.

 “The certificate provided on page 15 of this Constitution Petition does not fulfil the requirements of Rule 6 of Order XXV of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980.

 “No proof/resolution to the effect that petitioner is General Secretary of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf and filing the petition on behalf of said political party.

“Misconceiving multifarious prayers have been made in one Constitution Petition.

“The petition not only contained scandalous language but was also displayed to irrelevant parties, while the interim chief himself was impleaded as respondent No 7. He cannot be impleaded as party under Article 248 of the constitution”.

“The President, a Governor, the Prime Minister, a Federal Minister, a Minister of State, the Chief Minister and a Provincial Minister shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise of powers and performance of functions of their respective offices or for any act done or purported to be done in the exercise of those powers and performance of those functions.

“Since the constitution itself purports that a chief minister cannot be held accountable by the court of law, adding his name to the list of responders nullified the petition."