Daily Times

Supreme Court rewrote history and jurisprudence with its award of reserved seats to PTI. The controversial move has sparked a wave of debate and speculation, with many questioning the legality and implications of such a decision. In a bizarre judgment, the Supreme Court recently ruled in favour of awarding reserved seats to PTI, a decision that has sent shockwaves through the political establishment. The ruling came in response to a petition filed by SIC, not PTI, seeking to secure its rightful share of reserved seats in the parliament. While the decision has been hailed as a victory for democracy by PTI supporters, this decision to reverse time back to 8th February, despite PTI not even being a party in the case, has raised serious questions about the legitimacy of parliamentary amendments and the status of resolutions and bills passed by the now-affected MNAs and MPAs.

One of the key legal challenges facing the SC decision is the question of constitutionality. Critics argue that awarding reserved seats to PTI goes against the spirit of the constitution, which guarantees equal representation for all political parties. They contend that such a move could set a dangerous precedent and undermine the integrity of the electoral process. The Supreme Court did not hear from the grieving party, the MNAs and MPAs who are now set to lose their seats. What will be the fate of the legislation passed by these parliamentarians?

The notion that PTI holds 81 seats feeds well into its victory narrative but have we forgotten that a large majority of those candidates had fought in the election as independents?

Another challenge stems from the issue of parliamentary procedure. Some legal experts have raised concerns about the lack of transparency and due process in awarding reserved seats to PTI. They argue that the decision may have violated established parliamentary norms, adding to bad jurisprudence. This could open the door to legal challenges and potential appeals in the future, setting precedents for all those independent candidates who become a part of horse trading and keep switching sides for potential gains. Then again, the honourable judiciary would spend the next decades justifying the direction of their gavel.

In the coming days, before the mandated deadline to file official papers, we can expect to see heated chaos over PTI representation in the assemblies. The notion that PTI holds 81 seats feeds well into its victory narrative but have we forgotten that a large majority of those candidates had fought in the election as independents? Potential forward blocks loom large on the horizon making the return of the legislators’s interest to governance even more improbable. Those who are in the government are right in accusing the PTI of manipulating the legal system for its own gain. After all, how could any machinery work given the deep sense of division and mistrust among political parties, paving the way for further legal and political battles in the future?

As the political fallout intensifies, one thing is clear: the decision to award reserved seats to PTI has set the stage for a new era of uncertainty and conflict. The coming months will be critical in determining the future direction of Pakistani politics and the role of the judiciary in shaping the democratic process. Only time will tell how these legal battles will play out and what impact they will have on the country as a whole.

The writer is a freelance columnist.