PAKISTAN'S Supreme Court ruled on Thursday (7) that the National Assembly had been illegally dissolved, and ordered parliament to reconvene to hold a no-confidence vote that will likely see prime minister Imran Khan booted from office.
Khan asked the president to dissolve the assembly after the deputy speaker refused to allow a no-confidence vote against him on Sunday (3), but the Supreme Court said the action was illegal.
"All actions taken are of no legal effect and quashed," the court ruling said.
"The national assembly continues to remain in session."
The decision was met with jubilation by some in the capital, with cars loaded with opposition supporters racing through the streets and sounding their horns.
Khan claimed the opposition had colluded with the United States for "regime change" when the deputy speaker - a loyalist - refused to allow the no-confidence motion.
Simultaneously, Khan asked the presidency - a largely ceremonial office also held by a loyalist - to dissolve the assembly, meaning an election must be held within 90 days.
President Arif Alvi had already told the feuding factions to nominate candidates for interim prime minister and asked the country's election commission to fix a date for a new national ballot.
The opposition had refused to cooperate.
There had been high hopes for Khan when he was elected in 2018 on a promise of sweeping away decades of entrenched corruption and cronyism, but he struggled to maintain support with soaring inflation, a feeble rupee and crippling debt.
On Thursday (7) the rupee was trading at a historic low of 190 to the dollar, and the central bank raised the key interest rate by 250 basis points to 12.25 per cent - the biggest hike in over a quarter of a century.
Pakistan has been wracked by political crises for much of its 75-year existence, and no prime minister has ever seen out a full term.
Khan has blown anti-US sentiment into the political atmosphere by saying the opposition had colluded with Washington.
The cricketer-turned-politician says Western powers wanted him removed because he will not stand with them against Russia and China, and the issue is sure to ignite any forthcoming election.
The Supreme Court is ostensibly independent, but rights activists say previous benches have been used by civilian and military administrations to do their bidding throughout Pakistan's history.
Publicly the military appears to be keeping out of the current fray, but there have been four coups since independence in 1947 and the country has spent more than three decades under army rule.
(AFP)
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Start your day right!
Get latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
Related News
News
Teachers, nurses warn of strikes over 2.8 per cent pay rise proposal
EasternEye
11 December 2024
More For You

The tariffs had been imposed on all countries on February 24 for 150 days after a Supreme Court ruling struck down Trump’s earlier sweeping levies.
Getty Images
US court strikes down Trump’s 10 per cent global tariffs
May 08, 2026
A US federal court on Thursday struck down the 10 per cent global tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump, calling them “invalid” and “unauthorised by law”, in another setback for the White House.
The tariffs had been imposed on all countries, including India, on February 24 for 150 days after a Supreme Court ruling struck down Trump’s earlier sweeping levies.
The Supreme Court had ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorise the imposition of duties.
In a split verdict, the Court of International Trade said the provisions of the Trade Act of 1974 used by Trump to impose the 10 per cent tariffs could apply only in cases involving a balance-of-payments crisis.
Judges Mark A Barnett and Claire R Kelly said in the ruling that if the president has the ability to select among sub-accounts to identify a balance-of-payments deficit, unless every sub-account is balanced, the president would always be able to identify such a deficit.
“Such an expansive reading of the statute” would give Trump unlimited tariff powers that belong to Congress, the two judges said, adding that the government’s preferred interpretation of the statute should be disfavoured.
“This case turns on the meaning of Section 122 and whether the president asserted the existence of the conditions required by the statute in order to lawfully proclaim the import surcharges. ... As discussed further below, the President’s Proclamation fails to assert that those required conditions have been satisfied,” the majority judges said in the ruling.
Judge Timothy C Stanceu disagreed with the two other judges.
The US administration is expected to appeal against Thursday’s ruling.
The court’s decision directly applied only to three plaintiffs — the state of Washington, spice company Burlap & Barrel, and toy company Basic Fun!
India and the US had announced the framework for an interim bilateral trade agreement in February, which is now being renegotiated following the Supreme Court order.
Apart from the 10 per cent tariffs imposed under the Trade Act of 1974, the Office of the US Trade Representative is also investigating 60 countries, including India, over whether they are taking enough measures to stop trade in products created by forced labour.
(With inputs from agencies)
Keep ReadingShow less










