ISLAMABAD-The Supreme Court of Pakistan Friday issued notice to the Finance Division regarding provision of Rs21 billion to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) for holding elections in the Punjab province.
A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Munib Akhtar in its April 19 order had warned the government of serious consequences if it failed to release the funds (Rs21 billion) required for conducting polls in Punjab and KP.
Sources in the apex court said that the Registrar Office has sent the notice to the Ministry of Finance through a special messenger of the court. They also revealed that the Election Commission of Pakistan in pursuance of the notices, issued to it Thursday night filed the report about receiving of Rs21 billion for holding elections in the Punjab. It has been learnt that the ECP apprised the court that funds have not been provided by the government.
In this matter, the SC’s April 19 order said: “With respect, we were not satisfied that the earlier resolution stood in the way of the Federal Cabinet exercising its constitutional power under Article 84.” It said that on the basis of the Finance Division report the federal government did not itself have the requisite constitutional authority and power at all times to authorize the expenditure of Rs21 billion for the general elections, cannot be accepted. The effect of the Federal Cabinet’s decision to refer the matter to the National Assembly, and for Demand No. 64A to be rejected when voted upon by that House may now be considered.
The bench also said that it considered that in the system of the parliamentary democracy envisaged by the Constitution the government of the day must command the confidence of the majority of the National Assembly at all times. Furthermore, given that the office of Prime Minister has primacy (who is declared by Article 91(1) to be the chief executive of the Federation), this also means that the Prime Minister must enjoy the confidence of the majority of the National Assembly at all times.
It said that the government of the day must be able to secure the passage of all financial measures that it submits before the National Assembly. This would be certainly true for a financial measure of constitutional importance, i.e., one that seeks the release of funds for the holding of general elections to two Provincial Assemblies. The rejection of Demand No. 64A has serious constitutional implications. One possibility is that the Government (and also, since the Federal Cabinet is appointed on the advice of, and is headed by, him, the Prime Minister) have lost the confidence of the majority of the members of the National Assembly.