ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court intends to determine whether foreign nationality once acquired by lawmakers entails a permanent bar on them from entering parliamentevenif subsequently renounced by them.

The question cropped up on Wednesday during the hearing of a suo motu case regarding dual nationality of civil servants and judges.

On March 5, the Supreme Court had raised questions over the election of senators allegedly having dual nationality and asked the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) not to confirm their entry to the upper house until cleared by it.

The Pakistan Muslim LeagueNawaz appeared to be a major loser since senators Haroon Akhtar, Adviser to the Prime Minister on Revenue; Nuzhat Sadiq, Chairperson ofthe Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs; and Saadia Abbasi, sister of former prime minister Shahid Khagan Abbasi, belong to it, while Punjab Governor Chaudhry Mohammad Sarwar was also elected as a senator on a ticket of the Pakistan Tehreeki-Insaf. He later quit the Senate tobecome governor.

Advocate Bilal Minto, who appeared as amicus curiae (friend of the court) before a seven-judge SC bench headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, highlighted the issue. He argued that the language of Article 63(1)(c) of the Constitution was clear, adding that the acquisition of foreign citizenship was a trigger and the disqualification from becoming the member of parliament became complete once the foreign nationality was acquired.

Article 63 (1)(c) says: `A person shall be disqualified from being elected or chosen as a member of the parliament if he ceases to be a citizen of Pakistan or acquires the cidzenship of a foreign state.

It does not matter whether the lawmakers have revoked their foreign nationality or not, but once someone desires to acquire foreign nationality demonstrates that he moves away from the allegiance of Pakistan, Mr Minto argued.

He requested the bench to revisit the 2012 judgement of the Supreme Court regarding disqualification of parliamentarians under Article 62(1) (f) of the Constitution for having dual nationality because it posed certain ambiguity about the holding of dual nationality by lawmakers.

The court, however, asked senior counsel Hamid Khan and Barrister Ali Zafar, who were representing Chaudhry Sarwar and Haroon Akhtar, to furnish their response to the question posed by the court. It also asked Saadia Abbasi to engage a lawyer when the case will be taken up again on Oct 10.During the proceedings, Justice Umar Ata Bandial observed that whatever interpretation the Supreme Court should take should be liberal instead of being punitive, adding that `we should give the chance and opportunity to those who live outside the country to come and serve the country`.

`We have to take reasonable and liberal interpretation,` Justice Bandial emphasised.

The chief justice also observed that the apex court would also have to examine sections 4 and 14 of the Citizenship Act.

Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed asked the counsel representing different lawmakers to furnish documents which should in clear terms suggest that they have renounced their foreign nationality and the same was complete and conclusive without any `ifs` and `buts`. Otherwise, it will go against them, the judge said.

`Without wearing our glasses we should understand that the lawmakers are no longer citizens of the foreign country,` observed Justice Saeed, adding that no reference to the foreign laws for interpretation should be made. `You will then be in the business, otherwise not,` the judge emphasised.

Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan also reminded the counsel that disqualification once handed down could not be revoked.

The court, however, postponed further proceedings for Oct 10 since the documents furnished by the respondents were not complete, besides Saadia Abbasi had also not engaged her counsel.