Pakistan dethrones Nawaz Sharif | Daily News

Pakistan dethrones Nawaz Sharif

It is an irony of fate that Nawaz Sharif had been Prime Minister of Pakistan three times but unable to complete the full term of five years each time. The first time it was the President Ghulam Khan which dismissed him in 1993. Next time he was deposed by the Army. This time it was by the Supreme Court. Thus he was dismissed by the Executive, the Military and the Judiciary

Delivering judgement on a petition filed against Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s election to Parliament the Supreme Court of Pakistan unseated him from Parliament under Article 62 1(f) of the Constitution. Ironically Nawaz Sharif supported the passing of this Article when most other parties opposed it. The Supreme Court held that Sharif had violated this Article when he did not disclose the fact that he received a salary as Chairman of a Dubai-based firm in his nomination papers for the election in 2013.

It is an irony of fate that he had been Prime Minister of Pakistan three times but unable to complete the full term of five years each time. The first time it was the President Ghulam Khan which dismissed him in 1993. Next time he was deposed by the Army. This time it was by the Supreme Court. Thus he was dismissed by the Executive, the Military and the Judiciary.

In April 2016 Panama Papers revealed that Nawaz Sharif’s children had set up offshore companies in British Virgin Islands which owned properties in Britain. Then Imran Khan filed a petition in the Supreme Court against Nawaz Sharif.

Parliament has elected Shahid Abbhas as the interim Prime Minister. Though there were reports that Nawaz Sharif intends to nominate his brother as Prime Minister it is not yet confirmed whether he would do so or allow the Interim President to complete the remaining 10 months in office before the next elections. His brother Shabaz Sharif is currently the Chief Minister of Punjab.

Nawaz Sharif has throughout his tenure called for better relations with India but every instance of rapprochement was followed by terrorist attacks on Indian targets or provocations in the Indo-Pakistan border in their aftermath.

It was also commonly held that his relations with the military were not so cordial. It is revealing that the Wall Street Journal commenting on the ouster of Nawaz Sharif had called upon the new PM to cede more powers to the military. In Pakistan there is a type of dual power held by civilian administration and the military establishment. Pakistan has a history of military rule extending to almost half the period of its development as a State.

Rating agency Moody has predicted political instability in the present situation and warned that it could affect the economy adversely. There is also a possibility of a series of petitions against leaders of other political parties mentioned in the Panama Papers.

Bangladesh SC rules against Government

In July the Supreme Court of Bangladesh in delivering judgement on an appeal by the Government against a High Court verdict which ruled that Article 16 of the Constitution which gave power to Parliament to remove Supreme Court judges for misconduct or inefficiency was “illegal and unconstitutional” upheld the original decision of the High Court.

In May 2016, the High Court after hearing a public interest petition filed by nine Supreme Court lawyers had ruled that the 16th Amendment was “illegal and unconstitutional”, since it was contrary to the principles of the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary. The Amendment abolished the Chief Justice-led Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) which had the power to remove a Supreme Court judge after following due process and vested that power in Parliament as in the original Constitution of 1972.

In deciding against the 16th Amendment both the High Court and the Supreme Court observed that keeping intact Article 70 of the Constitution and giving powers to Parliament to remove Supreme Court judges placed judges at the mercy of party high command.

Article 70 of the Constitution says: “A person elected as a member of parliament at an election at which he was nominated as a candidate by a political party shall vacate his seat if he resigns from that party; or votes in parliament against that party; but shall not thereby be disqualified for subsequent election as a member of parliament.”

The decision of the Supreme Court was welcomed by the Opposition and civil society organisations while members of the Government including senior ministers were critical of it.

More sanctions on Russia

Last week the US Congress passed legislation imposing more sanctions on Russia. These are in addition to those imposed by the Obama administration in 2014 following Russia’s annexation of East Ukraine which included an asset freeze, restrictions on Russia’s oil industry, state finance and technology et al.

New targets include Russian Railways, Shipping, Metals and Mining industries as well as sanctions on companies dealing with Russian oil industry. Moreover new legislation prevents the US President from removing any sanctions without Congress approval. President Trump has expressed displeasure and said that relations with Russia is at a “dangerous low”. Russia has described the sanctions as a “full-scale trade war”.

In retaliation Russia has limited the staff of the US Embassy in Moscow to 455, which amounts to an expulsion of 755 diplomats. Any reduction of Russian staff in its Embassy in Washington would be met with further simultaneous equal reduction of US embassy staff in Moscow, according to the Russian Government.

Some European nations are unhappy about the new sanctions as it would affect their economic interests, particularly their energy security. 


Add new comment