LAHORE: The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz has termed the removal of its chief by the Supreme Court `against the basic principles of justice`while former prime minister Nawaz Sharif said challenging parliament`s authority to make and amend the Constitution amounted to challenging the state`s system.

However, his disqualification as party head triggered a debate on Mr Sharif`s possible replacement.

In the wake of the SC`s decision any of the three Sharif family members his wife Kulsoom Nawaz, brother Shahbaz Sharif or daughter Maryam Nawaz may be considered for the position of acting party head as a temporary arrangement, said a senior PML-N leader, quickly adding that the elder Sharif would continue as the supreme leader.

Shortly after the apex court`s decision, Mr Sharif held a meeting with his younger brother Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif, daughter Maryam Nawaz at Jati Umra Raiwind and discussed the verdict.

Prime Minister Shahid Khagan Abbasi also telephoned Mr Sharif and discussed the verdict.

When a couple of senior PML-N leaders were asked who would be the next party chief, they said whosoever headed the party would have to follow the orders of Mr Sharif.

`Mian sahib will remain the chief of the party. However, to make temporary arrangements in the wake of the SC`s decision any of the three Sharif family members Kulsoom Nawaz, Shahbaz Sharif or Maryam Nawaz may be considered for the position of acting party head, he said.

The other leader said Mr Sharif would hold a huddle of senior party leadership to decide the matter. `The fight is on. Our supreme leader will remain Nawaz Sharif. Whosoever will be new party chief he or she will have to follow the orders of Mr Sharif,` he said.

Earlier, Mr Sharif said if there was any ambiguity in any law (Elections Act, 2017)it should have been referred back to parliament for further interpretation. `One state institution has paralysed the executive,` he remarked.

In a statement, he said the parliament was a supreme elected institu-tion that determined the limits of other state organs. `It has the right to bring amendments to the constitution.

It will be a dangerous trend if a law framed by the parliament is annuled by unilateral interpretation and personal interpretation,` he added.

Mr Sharif added that if the laws passed by the parliament were dependent on the interpretation of the courts what kind of the constitution it was? He said if a section of the judiciary had considered the constitution `supreme and sacred`, then during the past 70 years neither democracy would have been disgraced nor dictators would have been allowed to suspend the constitution.

`The nation is witnessing what is happening today. People are witnessing as how a person and a family is being targeted.

Terming the verdict against the basic principles of justice, a spokesman for the PML-N said: `This decision finds no parallel in history of democracy in the country. This ver-tion that determined the limits of other state organs. `It has the right to bring amendments to the constitution.

It will be a dangerous trend if a law framed by the parliament is annuled by unilateral interpretation and personal interpretation,` he added.

Mr Sharif added that if the laws passed by the parliament were dependent on the interpretation of the courts what kind of the constitution it was? He said if a section of the judiciary had considered the constitution `supreme and sacred`, then during the past 70 years neither democracy would have been disgraced nor dictators would have been allowed to suspend the constitution.

`The nation is witnessing what is happening today. People are witnessing as how a person and a family is being targeted.

Terming the verdict against the basic principles of justice, a spokesman for the PML-N said: `This decision finds no parallel in history of democracy in the country. This ver-tion that determined the limits of other state organs. `It has the right to bring amendments to the constitution.

It will be a dangerous trend if a law framed by the parliament is annuled by unilateral interpretation and personal interpretation,` he added.

Mr Sharif added that if the laws passed by the parliament were dependent on the interpretation of the courts what kind of the constitution it was? He said if a section of the judiciary had considered the constitution `supreme and sacred`, then during the past 70 years neither democracy would have been disgraced nor dictators would have been allowed to suspend the constitution.

`The nation is witnessing what is happening today. People are witnessing as how a person and a family is being targeted.

Terming the verdict against the basic principles of justice, a spokesman for the PML-N said: `This decision finds no parallel in history of democracy in the country. This ver-dict may have serious ramification for democracy. It is a democratic right of a political party to choose its head which has been snatched.

The spokesman said this verdict restored the law of military dictators Ayub Khan and Pervez Musharraf.

`Efforts were made in the past to deprive political parties of their leadership through such controversial decisions which never succeeded.

Nawaz Sharif is not dependent on any ofhce, as he is a true leader of the Pakistanis. Nawaz Sharif is not the name of one person but an ideology, philosophy and movement.

He declared that the PML-N under Mr Sharif`s leadership would continue its struggle for the supremacy of the constitution, law and democracy.

In her reaction to the SC ruling, Maryam Nawaz tweeted: `This decision is not acceptable [to us]. Nawaz Sharif! You have won. The supreme institution of justice is not giving verdict against you but is endorsing your narrative and truth.