“A plain reading of Article 63 (1) (g) shows that the speaker’s jurisdiction to decide a question of disqualification arises only where there is some ambiguity,” she opined while talking to TheNation on Friday.
Nasira, who is also the president of Concerned Citizens of Pakistan (an NGO struggling for the rule of law in the country), maintained that in the present case, the Supreme Court had held Prime Minister Gilani guilty of contempt and sentenced him till rising of the court. “There is no ambiguity in the judgement regarding Gilani’s conviction on the contempt charges,” she affirmed. Justice (r) Nasira was of the view that in the light of the authoritative pronouncement, it was not open to the speaker to differ with the Supreme Court on the pretext of ‘applying her own mind’. She was duty bound to obey the apex court’s judgement and to refer the matter to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), asserted the former judge.
She also took strong exception to what she called ‘frivolous and biased remarks’ of the speaker on an extremely serious and solemn matter.
She said these were reflective of her open affiliation with the PPP.
“This is in itself enough to disqualify her from holding the neutral post of the speaker, and the propriety demands that she resign forthwith,” Nasira remarked, adding it was now deemed that the matter had been referred to the ECP for further action.






