The Lahore High Court has dismissed the petition against restricting the term of lifetime disqualification from parliament to five years.
Justice Shahid Bilal Hasan pronounced a reserved decision on the petition on Friday. The federal government lawyer had opposed the applications against the five-year term of disqualification for a lawmaker.
The petitioner had contended that parliament amended the law to set the limit for the disqualification to five years. According to the rules, the law of lifetime disqualification could not be amended by parliament through certain members, he added.
The petitioner further sought to declare null and void the law setting the lifetime disqualification period to five years.
Lifetime disqualification case
The Supreme Court had on January 8, in a case pertaining to the interpretation of Article 62(1)(f), abolished the lifetime disqualification of politicians from parliament.
The ruling was announced by a seven-member bench of the apex court, featuring Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Jamal Mandokhel, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, and Justice Musarrat Hilali. The case centred around Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution, which empowers parliament to prescribe qualifications for contesting elections.
The Supreme Court voted 6-1, which determined that politicians cannot be permanently disqualified under Article 62(1)(f). Emphasizing that contesting elections is a fundamental right of citizens, the court asserted its constitutional authority, highlighting that Section 184(3) doesn't possess the power to impose lifelong disqualifications.
The court ruled that political disqualifications won't span a lifetime. The judgment clarified that the Elections Act stipulates a disqualification period of up to five years, indicating that the duration of disqualification doesn't necessitate legislative scrutiny but rather judicial interpretation of Article 62(1)(f) of the constitution.
Justice Yahya Afridi expressed dissent, contending that disqualification under Article 62(1)(f) isn't inherently lifelong but extends until a judicial decision is made, echoing the correctness of the Samiullah Baloch decision.
In its written verdict, the court had ruled that the period of disqualification could not exceed five years.
