Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leader Senator Mian Raza Rabbani on Wednesday said Rule 84 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Senate, 2012, and Rule 108 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the National Assembly, 2007, pertaining to issuance of Production Order is a
right not a privilege, conferred by Rules framed under Article 67, Constitution, 1973.
The said Rules are at a higher ped
estal than Rules made under a statute as they draw their source from the Constitution, 1973.
The said Rules draw their strength from parliamentary practice and tradition in the international jurisdiction as also from Pakistan.
The arrest of Members of Parliament under detention laws in civil and criminal proceedings has been a common phenomenon in Pakistan. The purpose being to induce a change in party loyalty and/or prevent Members from the performance of their constitutional and parliamentary duties and functions, and/or preventing them from voting or forcefully obtain a crucial vote. In order to overcome this, “The Members of National Assembly (Exemption from Preventive Detention and Personal Appearance) Ordinance, 1963” was promulgated.
The said Ordinance provided that a Member shall not be arrested in any law relating to preventive detention, in order to be required to appear
in person in any Civil or Revenue Court or before an Election Tribunal during a Session and a period of 14 days before and 14 days after the Session.
This practice is not in isolation, in India exemption from arrested, detention and appear
in person under the civil process, was conferred in 1925, b
y The Legislative Members Exemption Act, 1925, which provided that during 14 days before and 14 days after a meeting of Parliament, the Member will not be arrested, howe
ver, in 1950, the scope of duration from arrest came to be the same as obtained in United Kingdom i.e. 40 days before or after a Session of the House.
Further the Rules of Procedure of Parliament and framed and adopted by the House under Article 67, Constitution, 1973, as such, fall within the domain of powers conferred by the Constitution on Parliament. Any interference by the Executive to change, alter or tinker with the said Rules will be an attempt to trespass into the domain of another institution created and functioning under the Constitution, 1973. It will amount to violating the concept of trichotomy of power which forms one of the bases of the Constitution, 1973.
It appears that the Executive has scant respect for the Constitution, 1973, as it continues to violate Article 160, Constitution, 1973, by not giving NFC Award, it continues to violate Article 154, Constitution, 1973, by allowing 150 days to lapse without calling a meeting of the Council of Common Interest, which under the Constitution is mandated to meet at least one in 90 days; it continues to violate the Constitution clause (3) of Article 154, Constitution, 1973, by not making a permanent Secretariat of the Council of Common Interest; it continues to violate Article 260 of the Constitution, 1973, when its Governors indulge in political horse trading.
A
right conferred by Parliament cannot be withdrawn, altered or amended by the Executive. Such an act alongwith the encouragement of horse trading only reflects the political weakness the Government and will ushering an era of greater political instability which will have a consequential effect on the already tottering economy.
These and other such related steps are a reflection of the authoritarian mindset of the Government, the Senate in the past has stood like Stalingrad against such attacks on its powers and sovereignty and will continue to do so in the future.
