Islamabad, March 24 : A five-member bench of the Pakistan Supreme court will be taking up the presidential reference seeking opinion on Article 63-A of the Constitution, which deals with the disqualification of parliamentarians over defection – at 1pm on Thursday, Dawn reported. Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial will head the bench which also includes Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice M b Akhtar and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail. Notices for the hearing have been issued to the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf’s lawyer Ali Zafar, PPP’s lawyer Farooq H Naek, PML-N’s lawyer Makhdoom Ali Khan and Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam-Fazl’s lawyer Kamran Murtaza, as well as the advocate general for Sindh, Islamabad inspector general of police, interior secretary and president of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), among others. On Monday, a two-member bench of the apex court comprising CJP Bandial and Justice Akhtar had taken up the presidential reference and declared that a larger bench would hear the case. On Thursday, the SCBA submitted a written reply to the apex court ahead of today’s hearing in accordance with the court’s directives, in which it stated that the votes of MNAs “cannot possibly be construed as a collective right of a political party”, citing Article 95 of the Constitution, which deals with the procedure to bring in a no-confidence motion against the prime minister. The SCBA also stated that Article 63-A, which deals with disqualification of a lawmaker over defection, cannot “control, restrict or limit the right of MNAs to participate in a vote of no-confidence against the prime minister”, adding that Article 63-A also does not restrict the right of MNAs to freely participate in proceedings. Outlining the procedure for voting on the no-trust move, the SCBA said that the rules showed that the Constitution and the Rules of Procedure “do not envisage a scenario whereby an MNA is restrained from casting his vote or where such a vote is not counted” adding that “Therefore, the question of pre-emptive action under Article 63-A cannot arise,” the association said, adding that powers under Article 63-A could not be exercised by a party head under the “mere apprehension that a member may defect”. The SCBA insisted that the consequences of Article 63-A for a defecting member “must remain limited to his removal from office as a member of the relevant House”. ACL1243