Pakistan’s President, Arif Alvi, has publicly stated that he rejected the signing of two bills aimed at granting authorities increased power to prosecute individuals for actions perceived as threats to the state and military. The move has generated significant controversy, with the law ministry arguing that Alvi’s refusal was unconstitutional.
The bills in question had successfully passed through both houses of Pakistan’s parliament, but Alvi’s affiliation with the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party, led by former Prime Minister Imran Khan, created a conflict of interest. The PTI opposes the coalition government responsible for passing these bills.
Alvi, in a statement shared on the social media platform X (formerly known as Twitter), proclaimed, “As God is my witness, I did not sign the Official Secrets Amendment Bill 2023 & Pakistan Army Amendment Bill 2023 as I disagreed with these laws.” He further disclosed that he instructed his staff to return the bills unsigned within the stipulated time, effectively rendering them ineffective.
However, Alvi expressed frustration, revealing that his staff had seemingly undermined his directive. The Ministry of Law and Justice voiced grave concerns over Alvi’s decision, emphasizing the gravity of the situation. According to the ministry, Pakistan’s President had two options: to provide assent to the bills or to refer the matter back to parliament accompanied by specific observations. Alvi opted for neither of these choices, a decision the ministry deemed contradictory to the principles enshrined in the constitution.
Under Pakistan’s constitution, if a draft bill does not receive the President’s signature or his observations or objections within 10 days following its approval in both houses, it automatically becomes law.
Debate and Divergence: Pakistan’s President Alvi’s Unconventional Stance on Legislation
Caretaker Law Minister Ahmad Iran confirmed that since Pakistan’s President Alvi neither signed nor returned the bills within the 10-day period, they had indeed become law.
Caretaker Information Minister Murtaza Solangi contended that Pakistan’s President Alvi’s personal social media statements held no legal authority. Solangi argued that Alvi failed to submit any objections to the bills within the specified timeframe, thereby undermining the validity of his public comments.
This turn of events has ignited a broader debate about the separation of powers in Pakistan’s government and the role of the president in the legislative process. Critics of Pakistan’s President Alvi’s actions assert that he ought to have followed established protocols for addressing concerns about legislation rather than resorting to social media. Some view his decision as an attempt to circumvent the legislative process and impose his personal stance on the bills.
On the other hand, supporters of President Alvi maintain that his refusal to sign the bills demonstrates his commitment to upholding democratic principles and safeguarding the rights of citizens. They argue that his public statement serves as an act of transparency, informing the public about his reasons for opposing the bills.
In conclusion, Pakistan’s President Arif Alvi’s refusal to sign two contentious bills has sparked a constitutional debate in Pakistan. While Alvi’s public statement on social media reflects his opposition to the bills, his failure to follow established procedures has raised questions about the legitimacy of his actions. This incident highlights the delicate balance between executive authority and democratic processes in the country’s governance.
