As per the law of the country, the caretaker government will continue till the elections are held, and they will hand over the government to the elected representatives after the elections, The Friday Times (TFT) has learned.
It is pertinent to mention that senior Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Fawad Chaudhry and other like-minded lawyers are speculating that the term of the caretaker government will end on April 22, and they are filing a petition in the courts against the caretaker government led by Syed Mohsin Raza Naqvi.
In a press conference, Fawad Chaudhry claimed that the constitution is silent about the term of caretaker government after 90 days.
Examples from the past
However, leading constitutional experts told TFT that the duration of the caretaker government was implicitly extended in the Haji Saif Ullah Case, PLD 1981 SC 166 at 191.
In the same manner, as has been done through the order passed in C.P. No. 05/2023, whereby the date of the election was brought forward to 14.5.2023.
A senior constitutional expert further maintained that in 2013 SCMR 1205 paragraph 15, it has been held that a caretaker government is put in place to run affairs of the state during the interim period, which is until the return to power of a duly elected government.
Therefore, agreeing with him, another acclaimed jurist said that the caretaker government remains in office during the currency of the entire interim period and until the return to power of the duly elected government.
It is pertinent to mention that even otherwise in 2008, when the then-co-chairman of the Pakistan Peoples Party, Benazir Bhutto, lost her life, the caretaker setup was allowed to function till a duly elected government was put in place.
‘Constitutional Convention’
One of the senior jurists said, too, that it has now become a constitutional convention that the caretaker government stays in place until a duly elected government takes over.
In PLD 1991 Lahore 78, at 109, it has been held that after the dissolution, a caretaker government is no longer answerable to the House, but nevertheless, it has to perform its functions with full responsibility until a permanent cabinet is formed.
The senior lawyer said that in the same judgment on page 170, it has been held by a Full Bench that the tenure of a caretaker Prime Minister (read Chief Minister) is to last until the induction into office of a regularly elected Prime Minister by a new assembly after the election.
"In 1994 PLC (CS) 215 it has been held at paragraph 5 that the caretaker government is as good as any other and has to perform functions till the newly elected government takes over," he noted.
Even otherwise, the continuation in office of a caretaker regime does not run contrary to any explicit constitutional provision (it is only implicit in Article 224-A at best). Here, the difference between mandatory and directory provisions in the Constitution also gains significance.
Judged by any yardstick and measured through any criteria, governance cannot be left unattended, and a caretaker regime goes home only when power is returned to an elected government upon its formation, and no time period has been explicitly provided.
Precedents from the rest of the world
In this respect, precedents and examples from the rest of the world are also forthcoming.
In 2010, as a result of a hung parliament in Belgium, the caretaker government continued for 500 days.
In 1996, in India, the tenure of a caretaker government was extended by legislative action until a new government could be formed.
In 2010, in Australia, where the duration of a caretaker government was not specified, as a result of a hung parliament, the tenure of the caretaker government was extended until a new government could be formed, but only after obtaining a consensus of approval from all political parties.
Likewise, in 2019, in Thailand, the caretaker government functioned beyond time without any particular extension.
Therefore, sources privy to this development said that there is no gainsaying that a caretaker regime continues to function till the time a popularly elected government is formed and takes over.
It is pertinent to mention that senior Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Fawad Chaudhry and other like-minded lawyers are speculating that the term of the caretaker government will end on April 22, and they are filing a petition in the courts against the caretaker government led by Syed Mohsin Raza Naqvi.
In a press conference, Fawad Chaudhry claimed that the constitution is silent about the term of caretaker government after 90 days.
Examples from the past
However, leading constitutional experts told TFT that the duration of the caretaker government was implicitly extended in the Haji Saif Ullah Case, PLD 1981 SC 166 at 191.
In the same manner, as has been done through the order passed in C.P. No. 05/2023, whereby the date of the election was brought forward to 14.5.2023.
A senior constitutional expert further maintained that in 2013 SCMR 1205 paragraph 15, it has been held that a caretaker government is put in place to run affairs of the state during the interim period, which is until the return to power of a duly elected government.
Therefore, agreeing with him, another acclaimed jurist said that the caretaker government remains in office during the currency of the entire interim period and until the return to power of the duly elected government.
It is pertinent to mention that even otherwise in 2008, when the then-co-chairman of the Pakistan Peoples Party, Benazir Bhutto, lost her life, the caretaker setup was allowed to function till a duly elected government was put in place.
‘Constitutional Convention’
One of the senior jurists said, too, that it has now become a constitutional convention that the caretaker government stays in place until a duly elected government takes over.
In PLD 1991 Lahore 78, at 109, it has been held that after the dissolution, a caretaker government is no longer answerable to the House, but nevertheless, it has to perform its functions with full responsibility until a permanent cabinet is formed.
The senior lawyer said that in the same judgment on page 170, it has been held by a Full Bench that the tenure of a caretaker Prime Minister (read Chief Minister) is to last until the induction into office of a regularly elected Prime Minister by a new assembly after the election.
"In 1994 PLC (CS) 215 it has been held at paragraph 5 that the caretaker government is as good as any other and has to perform functions till the newly elected government takes over," he noted.
Even otherwise, the continuation in office of a caretaker regime does not run contrary to any explicit constitutional provision (it is only implicit in Article 224-A at best). Here, the difference between mandatory and directory provisions in the Constitution also gains significance.
Judged by any yardstick and measured through any criteria, governance cannot be left unattended, and a caretaker regime goes home only when power is returned to an elected government upon its formation, and no time period has been explicitly provided.
Precedents from the rest of the world
In this respect, precedents and examples from the rest of the world are also forthcoming.
In 2010, as a result of a hung parliament in Belgium, the caretaker government continued for 500 days.
In 1996, in India, the tenure of a caretaker government was extended by legislative action until a new government could be formed.
In 2010, in Australia, where the duration of a caretaker government was not specified, as a result of a hung parliament, the tenure of the caretaker government was extended until a new government could be formed, but only after obtaining a consensus of approval from all political parties.
Likewise, in 2019, in Thailand, the caretaker government functioned beyond time without any particular extension.
Therefore, sources privy to this development said that there is no gainsaying that a caretaker regime continues to function till the time a popularly elected government is formed and takes over.