A day after the Supreme Court issued an interim order to count the quorum of the Parliament to include the vacant seats, Parliament once again passed a resolution to count the quorum without including the vacant seats.

The Parliament on Sunday began a debate on a decision on the Supreme Court's order restraining it from implementing the amendment to the Rules of Parliament to count the quorum of the Parliament without including the seats that are currently vacant among the constituencies represented by members in parliament.

Parliament amended Article 202 of the Parliament Rules, which includes the removal of the President or The Vice President, section of the Committee examining the Removal of the President or The Vice President, Section 203 of the Rules, and Article 49, which defines the legal strength of the Parliament.

The amendment to Rule 49 states that the seats in Parliament will be counted based on the total number of members who have remained as members at that time. If the seat of any constituency falls vacant except due to the expiry of the age of the Parliament, the total number of members of the Parliament shall not include the vacant seats. If there is any change in the total number of members, the Speaker shall announce it in the meeting to be held at the earliest, according to the amendment.

The schedule mentioned in the application form by the Attorney General states that a case has been filed in the Parliament regarding the issues to be passed on the basis of the vote of the "total members of the Parliament" and that a case has been filed in the Parliament regarding any of the issues that need to be passed by a vote based on the total number of members of the Parliament mentioned in the table.

Justice Aisha Shujoon said that the amendments made in the case to Article 49 of the Rules of Parliament were brought in the parliament sitting held on December 18 last year. The Attorney General's plea was received in the Supreme Court on January 29, a month after the amendment was passed, Justice Shujoon said.

"In view of the possibility of giving rise to situations where there may be violation of the Constitution in the future, and without giving an opportunity to the respondent to speak on such an offer, this is a case in which if an interim order is not passed before a final judgment is passed in the case, the communication of the matters contained in the subject of the case will be terminated. I am compelled to accept it as a situation that needs to be taken up," Justice Shujoon said.

Justice Dr. Mohamed Ibrahim supported Justice Shujoon's opinion not to pass an interim order in the case.

Justice Azmiralda Zahir, who differed in the case, said that the Attorney General's case raises a constitutional debate and that decisions based on political questions do not have jurisdiction over it.

"Even a rule of Parliament cannot violate the constitution, and if an interim judgment is not passed in this case, there is a possibility that the communication of matters on the subject of the case might be interrupted," Justice Azmiralda said.

She said that since the Constitution came into force on August 7, 2008, the number of members of parliament has been determined in accordance with Article 71 of the Constitution for the last 15 years. Article 86 of the Constitution prescribes the legal number of sittings of parliament, while Article 87 provides for the number of decisions to be taken by members of parliament. Justice Azmiralda said that years have passed and the quorum of the daily sittings of parliament is based on these clauses.

Justice Azmiralda said the implementation of the amendments to Section 49(a), (a) and (v) of the Rules of Parliament should be stayed as the Attorney General had filed a complaint alleging that it was unconstitutional.

"This is because in cases where every sitting held under Articles 49(a), (a) and (v) of the Rules of Parliament is convened and decisions are made in accordance with the provisions of Articles 86 and 87 of the Constitution, the manner in which parliament has acted since the beginning should continue till a decision is taken in the matter raised or until the court directs otherwise. This is a situation where an interim order has to be passed in the interest of the public," Justice Azmiralda said.

Justice Azmiralda said that even in the most ordinary cases where an interim order is sought, it is not mandatory to file a reply to the interim order if the judges are burdened that the order should be issued expeditiously.

Justice Mahaz Ali Zahir and Justice Husnu Suood upheld the opinion of Justice Azmiralda Zahir.

Justice Azmirda, therefore, directed the Parliament not to implement the amendments made to Article 49(a), (a) and (d) of the Rules of Parliament for the time being.

Speaker of the Parliament Mohamed Aslam today said that the Parliament should take a decision on the Supreme Court's decision to count the quorum of the Parliament by including the vacant seats. The Parliament has since decided not to uphold the order by the Supreme Court, and passed a resolution not to include the vacant seats in the quorum.