Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz has strongly criticized the Supreme Court’s recent decision to allocate reserved seats to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). Speaking at an event in Lahore on Friday, Maryam questioned the motivations behind the judiciary’s actions and accused them of “rewriting the Constitution” to favor a particular political figure. She expressed concern that the person the judiciary appears to want to bring back is, in her opinion, a criminal.
Maryam Nawaz issued a warning, vowing to deal firmly with any obstacles created to hinder progress. She questioned the opposition to development and asserted the manipulation of the Constitution for political gain. She highlighted that the Supreme Court’s ruling on July 12, which deemed PTI eligible for reserved seats, allowed the party to return to parliament. The Election Commission of Pakistan’s ruling in December 2023 excluded PTI from the February 8 elections, leading to this return.
In her argument, Maryam stated that this decision would result in a change in the makeup of the National Assembly and would put extra pressure on the coalition partnership. Despite having previously declared their affiliation to another party, she chastised the Supreme Court for granting the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) advantages that it had not requested. One of these advantages was a fifteen-day deadline to produce affidavits proving their devotion to the PTI.
Maryam Nawaz reaffirmed that the current government would finish its five-year term and issued a warning against any attempts to cause political instability. She declared a robust response to any such attempts. She emphasized that judges should base their decisions on the Constitution, not their personal preferences.
In her opinion, the efforts to reintegrate what she referred to as “the nation’s criminal” were unacceptable, and she questioned the origins of his financial support and power. In addition, Maryam voiced her disapproval of a “small group of people” whom she believes have issued instructions that create obstacles to the advancement of the nation. She reaffirmed that the law and the Constitution do not consent to the practice of floor crossing, in contrast to the Supreme Court’s decision.
