“Whether the condition of ‘secret ballot’ referred to in Article 226 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan,

 سپریم کورٹ نے سینیٹ الیکشن اوپن بیلٹ یا خفیہ بیلٹ کے ذریعے کرانے سے متعلق صدارتی ریفرنس پر اپنی رائے جاری کرتے ہوئے کہا ہے کہ سینیٹ انتخابات قانون کی بجائے آئین کے تحت ہوں گے،سینیٹ انتخابات اوپن بیلٹ سے نہیں کروائے جا سکتے۔

چیف جسٹس پاکستان جسٹس گلزار احمد کی سربراہی میں جسٹس مشیر عالم، جسٹس عمر عطا بندیال، جسٹس اعجاز الاحسن اور جسٹس یحییٰ آفریدی پر مشتمل پانچ رکنی لارجر بینچ نے جمعرات 25فروری کو آئین کے آرٹیکل 186کے تحت دائر کئے گئے صدارتی ریفرنس پر فریقین کے وکلاء کے دلائل مکمل ہونے کے بعد فیصلہ محفوظ کیا تھا۔

سپریم کورٹ نے اپنی رائے میں کہا کہ سینیٹ انتخابات اوپن بیلٹ سے نہیں کروائے جاسکتے، سینیٹ انتخابات قانون کے بجائے آئین کے تحت ہوں گے، سپریم کورٹ کی جانب سے رائے ایک چار کی نسبت سے دی گئی، جسٹس یحییٰ آفریدی نے رائے سے اختلاف کیا ہے۔

سپریم کورٹ نے اپنی رائے میں کہا کہ الیکشن کمیشن شفاف الیکشن کیلئے تمام اقدامات کر سکتا ہے، انتخابی عمل سے کرپشن ختم کرنا الیکشن کمیشن کی ذمہ داری ہے، تمام ادارے الیکشن کمیشن کےساتھ تعاون کے پابند ہیں۔

سپریم کورٹ نے کہا کہ الیکشن کمیشن کرپشن کے خاتمے کیلئے تمام ٹیکنالوجی کا بھی استعمال کر سکتا ہے، الیکشن کمیشن کے پاس اختیار ہے کہ وہ کرپٹ پریکٹس کے خلاف کارروائی کرے، تمام ایگزیکیٹو اتھارٹیز الیکشن کمیشن سے تعاون کی پابند ہیں۔

عدالت نے کہا کہ سینیٹ انتخابات آئین کے تابع ہیں، الیکشن کمیشن 218 تین کے تحت کرپشن روکنے کے تمام اقدامات کرے۔

چیف جسٹس نے کہا کہ سپریم کورٹ اپنے فیصلے میں قرار دے چکا ہے کہ سیکریسی کبھی بھی مطلق نہیں ہوسکتی، ووٹنگ میں کس حد تک سیکریسی ہونی چاہیے یہ تعین کرنا الیکشن کمیشن کا کام ہے۔

گزشتہ سماعت پر اٹارنی جنرل پاکستان اور دیگر فریقین کے دلائل مکمل ہونے پر عدالت عظمیٰ نے رائے محفوظ کی تھی۔

چیف جسٹس پاکستان کا کہنا تھا کہ عدالت کے سامنے سوال صرف آرٹیکل 226 کے نفاذ کا معاملہ ہے، کیا وجہ ہے کہ انتخابی عمل سےکرپشن کے خاتمے کے لیے ترمیم نہیں کی جا رہی؟ انتخابی عمل شفاف بنانے کے لیے پارلیمنٹ میں قراردادیں منظور ہوتی ہیں۔

واضح رہے کہ صدر مملکت عارف علوی نے سپریم کورٹ سے رائے لینے کے لیے صدارتی ریفرنس 23 دسمبر 2020 ء کو سپریم کورٹ میں دائر کیا تھا، چیف جسٹس کی سربراہی میں5 رکنی لارجر بینچ نے 4 جنوری کو اس کی پہلی سماعت کی تھی۔

صدارتی ریفرنس پر سپریم کورٹ میں مجموعی طور پر 20 سماعتیں ہوئیں، پنجاب، خیبر پختونخوا، بلوچستان کی صوبائی حکومتوں سمیت اسپیکر قومی اسمبلی اور چیئرمین سینیٹ نے اوپن بیلٹ کی حمایت کی جبکہ سندھ حکومت نے اوپن بیلٹ کو خلاف آئین قرار دیتے ہوئے مخالفت کی۔

صدارتی ریفرنس میں کہا گیا تھا کہ ماضی میں ہونے والے سینیٹ کے انتخابات آئین کے تحت نہیں کروائے گئے، اوپن بیلٹ سے سینیٹ الیکشن میں شفافیت آئے گی، خفیہ ووٹنگ کےسبب سینیٹ الیکشن کے بعد شفافیت پر سوال اٹھائے جاتے ہیں، خفیہ بیلیٹنگ سے ارکان کی خرید و فروخت کیلئے منی لانڈرنگ کا پیسہ استعمال ہوتا ہے۔

ریفرنس میں آئین میں ترمیم کیےبغیرخفیہ بیلٹ سے متعلق شق میں ترمیم پررائےمانگی گئی ہے، صدارتی ریفرنس میں رائے مانگی گئی ہےکہ آئین میں سینیٹ انتخابات کا واضح طریقہ موجود نہیں۔

صدارتی ریفرنس میں کہا گیا ہے کہ سپریم کورٹ آرٹیکل 226 کی تشریح کرے،سپریم کورٹ رائے دے کہ کیا سینیٹ انتخابات اوپن بیلٹ سے ہوسکتے ہیں۔

SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN

(Advisory Jurisdiction)

PRESENT:

Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, CJ

Mr. Justice Mushir Alam

Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial

Mr. Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan

Mr. Justice Yahya Afridi

REFERENCE NO.1 OF 2020

[Reference by the President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, under Article 186 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973]

For the Federation

[in Reference No.1/2020]

[in CMA.127-128, 170, 989,1293/2021]

: Mr. Khalid Jawed Khan, Attorney General for Pakistan

Mr. Sohail Mehmood, Addl. AGP

Mr. Ayaz Shaukat, DAG

[Assisted by Ms. Maryum Rasheed, Advocate]

For the National Assembly

[in CMA.278/2021]

: Mr. Abdul Latif Yousafzai, Sr. ASC

Mr. Muhammad Mushtaq, Addl. Secretary (Legislation)

Mr. Muhammad Waqar, DPO (Lit.)

For the Senate of Pakistan

[in CMA.296/2021]

: Senator Muhammad Ali Khan Saif

Mr. Muhammad Javed Iqbal, DD

For the Election Commission

[in CMA.210, 808, 880, 983,

1010/2021]

: Mr. Sikandar Sultan Raja, Chief Election Commissioner

Mr. Justice (R) Muhammad Iltaf Ibrahim Qureshi, Member (Punjab)

Mrs. Justice (R) Irshad Qaiser, Member (KP)

Mr. Shah Mehmood Jatoi, Member (Balochistan)

Mr. Nisar Ahmed Durrani, Member (Sindh)

Mr. Sajeel Shehryar Swati, ASC

Mr. Sana Ullah Zahid, ASC, L.A.

Dr. Akhtar Nazir, Secretary

Mr. Muhammad Arshad, DG (Law)

For Government of Punjab

[in CMA.95/2021]

: Mr. Ahmed Awais, AG

Barrister Qasim Ali Chohan, Addl.AG

Ms. Imrana Baloch, AOR

For Government of Sindh

[in CMA.386/2021]

: Mr. Salman Talib ud Din, AG

Mr. Sibtain Mahmud, Addl.AG

(via video link from Karachi)

For Government of KP

[in CMA.104/2021]

: Mr. Shumail Ahmad Butt, AG

Mr. Atif Ali Khan, Addl.AG

For Government of Balochistan :

Mr. Arbab M. Tahir, AG

[in CMA.185/2021] Mr. Muhammad Ayaz Khan Swati, Addl.AG

Mr. Muhammad Fareed Dogar, AAG

For ICT

[in CMA.149/2021]

: Mr. Niazullah Khan Niazi, AG

For JUI

[in CMA.129, 541/2021]

: Mr. Kamran Murtaza, Sr. ASC

Mr. Jehangir Khan Jadoon, ASC

For SHCBA

[in CMA.297, 1119/2021]

: Mr. Salahuddin Ahmed, ASC

Barrister Omer Soomro, ASC

Syed Riffaqat Hussain Shah, AOR

[Assisted by Ravi Pinjani, ASC]

[in CMA.130, 1201, 1292/2021] :

Mr. Hassan Irfan Khan, ASC

For PPP

[in CMA.131, 704, 1217/2021]

: Mian Raza Rabbani, Sr. ASC

Mr. Mehmood A. Sheikh, AOR

[in CMA.154,1295/2021] :

Malik Qamar Afzal, ASC

For JI

[in CMA.211/2021]

: Mr. Ishtiaq Ahmed Raja, ASC

[in CMA.231/2021] :

Syed Iqbal Hashmi, ASC

For PML N

[in CMA.784, 1231/2021]

: Barrister Zafar Ullah, ASC

For Pakistan Bar Council

[in CMA.807, 1200/2021]

: Mr. Mansoor Usman Awan, ASC

For PPP (P)

[in CMA.872,1218/2021]

: Mr. Farooq H. Naek, Sr. ASC

[in CMA.908, 1008, 1026-1030/2021] :

Mr. Khurram Shehzad Chughtai,

Advocate High Court, in person

[in CMA.1115/2021] :

Mr. Azhar Iqbal, ASC

[in CMA.1233/2021] :

Mr. Waheed Ahmed Kamal, in person

Dates of Hearing : 04.01.2021, 11.01.2021, 13.01.2021, 14.01.2021, 02.02.2021, 03.02.2021, 04.02.2021, 08.02.2021, 10.02.2021, 11.02.2021, 15.02.2021, 16.02.2021, 17.02.2021, 18.02.2021, 19.02.2021, 22.02.2021, 23.02.2021, 24.02.2021; and 25.02.2021

O P I N I O N

The President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has sent a REFERENCE under Article 186 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred to as “the Constitution”), for opinion of this Court. The question asked in the REFERENCE is as follows:

“Whether the condition of ‘secret ballot’ referred to in Article 226 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, is applicable only for the elections held ‘under’ the Constitution such as the election to the office of President of Pakistan, Speaker and Deputy Speaker of National Assembly, Chairman and Deputy Chairman of Senate, Speakers and Deputy Speakers of the Provincial Assemblies and not to other elections such as the election for the members of the Senate of Pakistan held under the Elections Act, 2017, enacted pursuant to Article 222 read with Entry 41, Part 1, Fourth Schedule to the Constitution, which may be held by way of secret or open ballot, as may be provided for in the Election Act, 2017.?”

2. We have heard learned Attorney General for Pakistan, learned Advocate Generals of all four Provinces and ICT, learned counsel appearing for the National Assembly, the Senate of Pakistan, the Election Commission, Political Parties, Pakistan Bar Council, Sindh High Court Bar Association and the individuals, who have appeared in person.

3. For the detailed opinion to be recorded later, the REFERENCE is answered as follows:

(i) ( The Elections to the Senate of Pakistan are held “under the Constitution” and the law;

(ii) It is the duty of the Election Commission of Pakistan in terms of Article 218(3) of the Constitution, to ensure that the election is conducted honestly, justly, fairly and in accordance with law and that corrupt practices are guarded against on which this Court has given successive judgments and the most exhaustive being Workers’ Party Pakistan through Akhtar Hussain, Advocate, General Secretary & 6 others v. Federation of Pakistan & 2 others (PLD 2012 SC 681);

(iii) The Election Commission of Pakistan is required by the Constitution to take all necessary steps in order to fulfil the above mandate/duty in terms of Article 222 of the Constitution, which empowers the Parliament, subject to the Constitution to legislate, inter alia, on the conduct of elections and matters relating to corrupt practices and other offences in connection with elections but categorically provides that, “no such law shall have the effect of taking away or abridging any of the powers of the Commissioner or the Election Commission” under Part VIII, Chapter 1 of the Constitution;

(iv) Further in terms of Article 220 of the Constitution, all the executive authorities in the Federation and Provinces are obliged to assist the Commissioner and the Election Commission of Pakistan in discharge of his or their functions, as provided for in Article 218(3) of the Constitution;

(v) As far as the secrecy of ballot is concerned, this Court has already answered this question in a judgment of a 5-member Bench of this Court reported as Niaz Ahmad v. Azizuddin & others (PLD 1967 SC 466), where it has been held that secrecy is not absolute and that “the secrecy of the ballot, therefore, has not to be implemented in the ideal or absolute sense but to be tempered by practical considerations necessitated by the processes of election”;

(vi)Furthermore, in order to achieve the mandate of the Election Commission in terms of Article 218(3) read with Article 220 and other enabling provisions of the Constitution and the law, the Election Commission is required to take all available measures including utilizing technologies to fulfil the solemn constitutional duty to ensure that the election is “conducted honestly, justly, fairly and in accordance with law and that corrupt practices are guarded against”.

The REFERENCE is answered accordingly.

CHIEF JUSTICE

JUDGE

JUDGE

JUDGE

With utmost respect the opinion sought being not a question of law within the contemplation of Article 186 of the Constitution is returned unanswered.

JUDGE

YAHYA AFRIDI, J.- For the reasons to be recorded later, with utmost respect, the opinion sought by the Worthy President, Islamic Republic of Pakistan in the instant Reference, is not a question of law within the contemplation of Article 186 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, accordingly, the same is returned unanswered.

Judge

OPINION OF THE COURT

For the detailed opinion to be recorded later, by majority of 4 against 1 (Yahya Afridi, J.) dissenting, the REFERENCE is answered as follows:

(i) The Elections to the Senate of Pakistan are held “under the Constitution” and the law;

(ii) It is the duty of the Election Commission of Pakistan in terms of Article 218(3) of the Constitution, to ensure that the election is conducted honestly, justly, fairly and in accordance with law and that corrupt practices are guarded against on which this Court has given successive judgments and the most exhaustive being Workers’ Party Pakistan through Akhtar Hussain, Advocate, General Secretary & 6 others v. Federation of Pakistan & 2 others (PLD 2012 SC 681);

(iii) The Election Commission of Pakistan is required by the Constitution to take all necessary steps in order to fulfil the above mandate/duty in terms of Article 222 of the Constitution, which empowers the Parliament, subject to the Constitution to legislate, inter alia, on the conduct of elections and matters relating to corrupt practices and other offences in connection with elections but categorically provides that, “no such law shall have the effect of taking away or abridging any of the powers of the Commissioner or the Election Commission” under Part VIII, Chapter 1 of the Constitution;

(iv) Further in terms of Article 220 of the Constitution, all the executive authorities in the Federation and Provinces are obliged to assist the Commissioner and the Election Commission of Pakistan in discharge of his or their functions, as provided for in Article 218(3) of the Constitution;

v) As far as the secrecy of ballot is concerned, this Court has already answered this question in a judgment of a 5-member Bench of this Court reported as Niaz Ahmad v. Azizuddin & others (PLD 1967 SC 466), where it has been held that secrecy is not absolute and that “the secrecy of the ballot, therefore, has not to be implemented in the ideal or absolute sense but to be tempered by practical considerations necessitated by the processes of election”;

(vi) Furthermore, in order to achieve the mandate of the Election Commission in terms of Article 218(3) read with Article 220 and other enabling provisions of the Constitution and the law, the Election Commission is required to take all available measures including utilizing technologies to fulfil the solemn constitutional duty to ensure that the election is “conducted honestly, justly, fairly and in accordance with law and that corrupt practices are guarded against”.

CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE JUDGE

LARGER BENCH ISLAMABAD 01.03.2021