The Supreme Courtroom has ruled that President Muhammad Ashraf Ghani and his vice-presidents shall continue to serve till the election of a new president. This ruling comes in the wake of mounting strain by a variety of presidential candidates and their political backers, who’ve referred to as on the authorities leaders to step down after 22 Might, when their constitutional term ends. The ruling additionally comes after the Unbiased Election Fee (IEC) announced yet one more delay in the holding of the presidential elections. These at the moment are scheduled for 28 September 2019, greater than 4 months after the president’s five-year constitutional term ends on 22 Might, sparking political debate over whether the current president ought to stay in workplace thereafter. AAN’s researcher Ali Yawar Adili appears at the continuing constitutional disaster. He notes that while delays in elections and the extension of the presidential tenure beyond its constitutional timeframe are nothing new, there are variations this time that would result in political deadlock.
The Supreme Courtroom’s choice on the presidential tenure
The repeated delays to the 2019 presidential elections have sparked a debate as to who ought to run Afghanistan after the finish of the presidential time period on the first of Jawza of the fifth yr (22 Might 2019). The new IEC made an announcement on 20 March, the eve of Nawruz (the Afghan New Yr), that the presidential elections can be delayed. The IEC stated that elections couldn’t be held as deliberate on 20 July 2019, which was already two months after the constitutional finish of the president’s time period in office. The explanations offered by the IEC have been that the amended electoral regulation contained new obligations that would not be met in time, most notably the use of know-how in all phases of the elections (see AAN’s previous reporting about the amendments here). The IEC additionally noted that it needed time to deal with some of the challenges and issues of the 2018 Wolesi Jirga elections and that reforms ought to be carried out earlier than the subsequent elections. The IEC also stated that there had been basic delays in the preparations for the elections that necessitated rescheduling them. The IEC announced 6 Mizan 1398 (28 September 2019) as the new date for the presidential elections, provincial elections, Wolesi Jirga elections in Ghazni.
The structure is obvious that the elections ought to be held 30 to 60 days earlier than the finish of the presidential time period, however omits to say what ought to happen if elections usually are not held. That’s, the structure doesn’t point out whether or not the sitting president’s time period ought to be extended till elections are held or whether transitional governance arrangements must be put in place for the interim period. Whereas President Ghani and the National Unity Government are eager to hold onto power during the interim interval, other presidential candidates have been calling on the leaders of the National Unity Government to step down after 22 Might. Nevertheless, they’ve additionally been struggling to return to an settlement about an alternate that could possibly be both constitutional and acceptable to the individuals and supported by Afghanistan’s worldwide partners. Subsequently, if they proceed to put strain on the authorities to step down, a deadlock may ensue given the lack of any clear constitutional various.
As a result of mounting strain from presidential candidates and their backers, the deputy for coverage, monitoring and evaluate in the presidential palace’s legal department sent a letter earlier this month (1) to the Supreme Courtroom (letter number 529 dated 28/1/1398 (17 April 2019), informing the courtroom that the IEC had postponed the presidential elections until 28 September 2019. The letter said that this had resulted in a niche of more than 4 months between the end of the president’s time period on 22 Might and the new elections (the gap can be even more until the completion of elections, especially in the event that they go to a second spherical or outcomes drag on). The president’s workplace asked the Supreme Courtroom to assessment article 61 of the constitution and supply its legal opinion on governance preparations between the finish of the president’s constitutional term and the conclusion of the elections. Article 61 refers to the election of the president and his/her term. It says that the presidential time period expires on the first of Jawza (22 Might 2019 in the case of the present president) of the fifth yr following elections and that elections for a new president ought to be held within 30 to 60 days previous to the end of the presidential time period.
In response to the letter despatched by the president’s office, the Supreme Courtroom issued (media stories right here and here) a ruling on 20 April 2019 extending the president and vice-presidents’ phrases until a brand new president is elected. The Excessive Council of the Supreme Courtroom in its approval (determination) quantity 100 dated 31/01/1398 (20 April 2019) cited the full textual content of an analogous ruling issued by the Excessive Council of the Supreme Courtroom in 2009. The 2009 ruling concerned who should govern the nation after the finish of the presidential term, as the elections had not been held properly prematurely. The Supreme Courtroom dominated that the then-president ought to continue to serve until the election of a new president.
The 2009 ruling, as cited by the Supreme Courtroom in its 20 April 2019 approval, was based mostly on two arguments:
- Indivisibility of the totally different provisions in the article of the structure that offers with the election and term of the president. The Supreme Courtroom had argued that paragraphs two and three of article 61 of the structure stating that “the presidential term shall expire on 1st of Jawza of the fifth year after elections” and that “elections for the new President shall be held within thirty to sixty days prior to the end of the presidential term” have been complementary. Subsequently, as a result of the elections had been postponed, so the entire provision ought to be delayed. This, in follow, meant that the presidential term, which, in line with the second paragraph, would have ended on 22 Might (2009) had elections been held 30 to 60 days before that, can be extended. (2)
- Qa’ida-e fiqhi (jurisprudential rule, an Islamic Fiqh/jurisprudence term) is baqa ma kana ala ma kana (persevering with the established order ante), ie continuing previously present affairs signifies that the time period of the president and his vice-presidents as the established order ante should continue till the elections.
After citing this 2009 ruling, the Supreme Courtroom in its 20 April 2019 ruling, concluded that since the queries made by the president’s office in 2009 and in 2019 had been the similar, the Supreme Courtroom’s determination would even be the similar. (three) This, in apply, signifies that the incumbent president and his vice-presidents should proceed to rule the country until the election of a new president.
Earlier precedents of extensions to the presidential term
This is not the first time that the presidential term in Afghanistan has been prolonged. As famous above, the presidential time period expires on first of Jawza of the fifth yr after his/her election (22 Might 2019 in the case of the current president), and elections for the new president ought to be held within 30 to 60 days previous to that. Nevertheless, up to now, no elections have adhered to this rule as they’ve both been delayed or dragged on beyond this timeframe and consequently the presidential time period has all the time been extended past the 1stof Jawza.
The 2009 presidential elections have been held on 20 August 2009, virtually three months after the end of the president’s constitutional time period. Some candidates, including the current president, Ashraf Ghani, referred to as for the end of Karzai’s term after 22 Might 2009. Karzai’s workplace sought a ruling from the Supreme Courtroom, which (as described above) stated that the continuation of his time period was in the pursuits of the nation (see AAN’s earlier reporting right here and right here).
The first spherical of the 2014 presidential elections was held on 5 April 2014 inside the constitutional timeframe (30-60 days before the end of the presidential term, ie 22 Might 2014). Nevertheless, the tabulation and announcement of outcomes took extra time. Moreover, the elections went to a second round, which, nevertheless, was not held within the authorized timeframe, ie inside two weeks after the announcement of the outcomes of the first spherical. Subsequently, former President Karzai’s office of administrative affairs and the secretariat of the Council of Ministers had asked, in letter quantity 1186 dated 22/2/1393 (12 Might 2014), that the Unbiased Fee for Overseeing the Implementation of the Structure (ICOIC) present authorized advice on paragraph two of article 61 of the constitution, which stipulated that his term would finish on 22 Might. (four) It is unclear why the former president’s office, in contrast to in 2009, sought a ruling from the ICOIC in 2014. There has additionally been some debate as as to if the Supreme Courtroom or ICOIC ought to be the authority to interpret the constitution (see AAN’s earlier reporting right here and right here).
Abdullah Shafayi, a member of the ICOIC, informed AAN on 25 April 2019 that the government would often seek a ruling from an authority (similar to the Supreme Courtroom or the ICOIC) that was more “aligned” with the authorities. He claimed that the authorities had not often referred constitutional points to the ICOIC since the president (Ghani) had opposed its members’ choice to dismiss the chairman of the fee in 2017 (see AAN’s background right here).
The ICOIC’s determination (made on 28/2/1393 (18 Might 2014)) in response to the presidential palace’s 12 Might 2014 request to interpret article 61 of the constitution was consistent with the Supreme Courtroom’s 2009 ruling in that it permitted the continuation of the presidential term after 22 Might 2014. The ICOIC’s determination ( obtainable right here in Dari) contained two elements: First, the ICOIC noted that the IEC needed to offer an evidence to the ICOIC as to why the outcomes of the first round and the entire of the second spherical of the elections had been delayed. Requesting the IEC to elucidate the delays was more than likely the ICOIC’s means of making certain that it might verify whether or not the delays have been constitutionally justifiable. Second, the ICOIC stated that if the first of Jawza (22 Might 2014) fell while the last outcomes of the runoff had not yet been introduced as a result of justified causes suitable with the rules of the structure, the continuation of the president and his vice-presidents after the first Jawza until the announcement of the remaining results inside the period specified by the IEC wouldn’t be thought-about as being in breach of the structure. (5)
Delays to the 2019 presidential elections
The date for the upcoming presidential elections was introduced by the IEC on 1 August 2018 as being scheduled for 20 April 2019 (see AAN’s previous reporting right here and here). Since then, the elections have been delayed twice, both occasions being pushed again past the president’s constitutional time period.
On 30 December 2018 the former members of the IEC, after weeks of speculation, formally delayed the presidential elections till 20 July 2019. Reasons for the delay included: the need for reform, especially after the mismanagement of the 2018 parliamentary elections; winter weather circumstances; and attainable strain on account of peace talks, or perhaps a negotiated settlement earlier than the polls (see AAN’s report here).
On 20 March, on the eve of Nawruz, the Afghan New Yr, the new members of the IEC stated in a press release that it will not be potential to carry the elections on the specified date of20 July 2019 and as an alternative announced 28 September as the new date. The IEC nonetheless left a caveat – that the elections might be held on the above-mentioned date, 28 September, provided that related stakeholders, especially the authorities and the international group, have been capable of provide the required price range to the IEC and fulfil their obligations. In its operational plan, the IEC has an estimated finances of 207 million dollars for holding three units of elections: presidential, provincial council and Wolesi Jirga elections in Ghazni (see media report here). It has dropped the district council elections as soon as again.
Mounting strain for a brand new arrangement after 22 Might
The primary delay (shifting the election date from 20 April to 20 July) had already provoked a debate in political circles regarding the finish of the presidential time period. For example, former national safety adviser and presidential candidate, Hanif Atmar, referred to as on the leadership of the present authorities to step down after their authorized term had expired. At the time, Nur Rahman Akhlaqi of Jamiat-e Islami advised AAN that since the constitution did not specify whether the current authorities might proceed after 22 Might, it only stipulated that the authorities would not be reliable, they might name for a grand political national consensus among political parties and civil society, supported by the international group, to determine on an alternate. In accordance with him, this might be: 1) a continuation of the government but with a reduction in the president’s authorities; 2) an interim government; or, 3) the president stepping down and, for instance, the chief justice taking up the affairs of the state (see here).
Nevertheless, following the second delay and as 22 Might approached, 11 out of 18 presidential tickets (learn AAN’s previous report about these 18 presidential tickets here) coalesced around a name for the authorities to be dissolved after 22 Might. These candidates included Ahmad Wali Massud, Rahmatullah Nabil, Enayatullah Hafiz, Ghulam Faruq Najrabi, Faramarz Tamana, Muhammad Ibrahim Alekozai, Muhammad Hakim Tursan, Muhammad Hanif Atmar, Muhmmad Shahab Hakimi, Nur Rahman Liwal and Nurul Haq Olomi. They issued a press release on 26 Hamal 1398 (15 April 2019) saying “We categorically announce that the term of the government ends on 1st Jawza 1398 (22 May 2019), [and] consider use of any political trick for continuation as unjustified and in conflict with the national stability of the country.” Additionally they stated they might finalise an alternate plan for the government in mild of the legal guidelines and in accordance with legal professionals, politicians, civil society and other segments of society at the very earliest risk, which, they stated, can be announced in a press conference.
Perhaps in an attempt to go off the Supreme Courtroom’s ruling in favour of the continuation of the presidential time period, on 20 April 2019 they issued a second assertion saying that “the leaders of the national unity government are duty bound to hand over the government after 1st Jawza (22 May).” They claimed that, based mostly on the info and documents that that they had acquired, the presidential palace was making an attempt to put strain on the Supreme Courtroom to challenge an interpretation in favour of a continuation of the presidential time period till elections have been held. They stated this was an “obvious violation and harming the reputation and independence of the judiciary.” The Supreme Courtroom did challenge its ruling in favour of the continuation of the current president until the election of a brand new president, which is an unspecified timeframe, provided that elections could possibly be delayed once more or may go to a second spherical, or the tabulation and announcement of the results may drag on.
Conclusion: reactions and situations
The 11 presidential candidates talked about above (see here) issued a joint assertion on 21 April in response to the ruling by the Supreme Courtroom. They argued that the Supreme Courtroom did not, following the adoption of the regulation on the establishment and authority of the Unbiased Fee for Overseeing the Implementation of the Structure (ICOIC), have the authority to interpret the structure provided that the authority tasked with deciphering the structure had been shifted from the Supreme Courtroom to the ICOIC. (At the time, the Supreme Courtroom had commented that this regulation had introduced a battle between its mandate and that of the ICOIC. When the ICOIC’s regulation was finally revealed in the official gazette in July 2009, it appeared along with the Supreme Courtroom’s opinion without clarification as to what this opinion meant for the interpretation of the regulation – see AAN’s background here).
Neither did the 11 presidential candidates agree that the extension authorised by the Supreme Courtroom in 2009 was similar to the one they permitted in 2019. They questioned the Supreme Courtroom’s reference that in 2009 the political elites had agreed to the extension, saying that, even when such an settlement had existed in 2009, presently both political parties and élites agreed that the presidential term ought to end. Whether or not such a consensus does exist is debatable. Some of the presidential candidates have issued separate statements damning the courtroom’s choice. As an example, the Security and Justice group led by former NDS chief Rahmatullah Nabil stated in a press release on 22 April that the Supreme Courtroom’s interpretation of article 61 of the structure in favour of the continuation of the government after 22 Might was in battle with this essential article within the regulation. It stated that no interpretation of the constitution might push back the finish of the presidential term to an unknown time, that’s to say, till presidential elections are held, the date of which is not but clear (this is perhaps doubting that elections can even be held on 28 September, and even if they are held on schedule, it’s unclear when they may be concluded). Nabil’s Security and Justice workforce stated that it thought-about it its obligation and duty to place an end to this unlawful challenge after 22 Might through the use of all authorized channels and civil protests. The Nationwide Accord group led by Ahmad Wali Massud referred to as the Supreme Courtroom’s ruling “made to order” and the extension “illegal.”
The federal government has not officially commented on the Supreme Courtroom’s ruling. President Ashraf Ghani, in an introductory assembly with MPs on 23 April 2019, stated (right here and right here) :
“Our objective is stability, not the stability that comes from the bayonet of gun, force or gold (money), [but] a stability that is the result of implementation of the constitution. Whatever puts aside the constitution is in fact a coup d’état, and this nation does not accept coup d’ états. We want implementation.” He repeated this assertion in his tackle at the inauguration of the new MPs on 26 April, saying that “those who seek to undermine the national document namely the constitution by spreading ambiguity, doubt and distrust are close to coup plotters, I tell them that the age of coup d’états is over.” He stated, “I am the president until completion of transparent and general elections in the country.” Throughout the ceremony commemorating eight Saur on 28 April 2019, Ghani’s second Vice-President Sarwar Danesh added that “the proposals such as caretaker or interim government do not have any legal reason and basis and, therefore, the Supreme Court, as the authority for interpreting the constitution, has endorsed this view.”
Meanwhile, whereas the Supreme Courtroom’s ruling does not make any mention of the National Unity Government or the Chief Government’s office, the Chief Government’s office has welcomed the ruling, saying that the Nationwide Unity Government would proceed to serve till the election of a new president (media report here). (6)
In each 2009 and 2014, the president served beyond the constitutional expiry date, both due to the postponement of the elections (2009) or the drawn-out election course of (2014). The then-president’s office sought a ruling from the Supreme Courtroom in 2009 and from the ICOIC in 2014 for continuation, both arguing that the continuation of the incumbent president and authorities was extra suitable with the spirit of the structure.
In sensible terms, nevertheless, there are some differences: 1) there’s a longer delay in the elections this time around and there might even be further delays provided that sure primary but essential issues, akin to the use of know-how and the price range haven’t but been resolved. 2) There has been a critical debate each among national and worldwide circles about the sequencing of elections and a peace process (see AAN’s stories right here and here). Any vital progress in the ongoing peace talks and efforts may delay the elections. 3) The present government is a nationwide unity government based mostly on a political deal (see this AAN’s earlier report “Elections 2014 (51): Finally, a deal, but not yet democracy” right here), an improvised answer after a contentious presidential election, the mandate of which has been a subject for discussion earlier than, see AAN’s earlier report “When The Political Agreement Runs Out: On the future of Afghanistan’s National Unity Government” right here). Whether or not or not the Supreme Courtroom’s ruling will stand up to the political strain if maintained, or which of the situations will prevail, remains to be seen in the weeks and months ahead.
Edited by Sari Kouvo
(1) The complete text of the 17 April letter by the legal division of the presidential palace (AAN has not seen a replica of it however it is cited in the Supreme Courtroom’s ruling, see under AAN’s working translation of it):
Earlier in 1388 (2009), based mostly on the request of the office of the administrative affairs and the secretariat of the Council of the Ministers, the high council of the Supreme Courtroom, by means of approval number (169)dated 18/1/1388, offered its authorized opinion about the term of the president as a consequence of the postponement of the elections.
Now also the Unbiased Elections Fee has postponed the presidential elections till 6 Mizan 1398 (28 September 2019) for better implementation of the provisions of the electoral regulation, particularly provisions of article 19 of the amendment to the electoral regulation, making certain transparency and implementing voter registration and identification in a protected means, whereas the term of the president, in response to article 61 of the constitution, ends on the first Jawza of the fifth yr after elections and elections for a brand new president ought to be held 30 to 60 days before the end of the time period of the president. However the determination of the Unbiased Election Fee leads to more than 4 months of gap between the end of the president’s time period and the new elections.
Subsequently, contemplating the political and security state of affairs and the choice of the Election Fee and to be able to forestall power vacuum, disruption in authorities’s duties and carrying out the affairs of the presidency of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, it requires that the Supreme Courtroom of I.R.A as soon as once more evaluation the implementation of article 61 of the constitution and provide its authorized opinion [so it can] be shared with the president of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.
(2) Article 61 of the constitution reads:
The President shall be elected by receiving greater than fifty % of votes forged by voters via free, basic, secret and direct voting.
The presidential time period shall expire on 1st of Jawza of the fifth yr after elections.
Elections for the new President shall be held inside thirty to sixty days previous to the finish of the presidential term.
If in the first spherical none of the candidates will get greater than fifty % of the votes, elections for the second spherical shall be held within two weeks from the date election results are proclaimed, and, in this spherical, solely two candidates who have acquired the highest number of votes in the first round shall take part.
In case one in every of the presidential candidates dies during the first or second spherical of voting or after elections, but previous to the declaration of outcomes, re-election shall be held in response to provisions of the regulation.
(3) The complete textual content of the Supreme Courtroom’s 20 April 2019 response to the 17 April 2019 letter by the legal division of the presidential palaces revealed by Ariana Information (An AAN working translation):
The high council of the Supreme Courtroom of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, after a complete assessment of the text of the letter by the workplace of deputy for coverage, monitoring and evaluate of the legal department of the presidential palace, opines as comply with:
The current problem has a precedent, as in the earlier elections, when the Election Fee introduced the date for the 2009 elections with some months of delay, resulting from technical reasons, the then-government requested the Supreme Courtroom for a legal rationalization for the concern whereupon the excessive council of the Supreme Courtroom, at the time, about the delay in the election date, had opined as under in view of the provisions of the regulation:”
- The Supreme Courtroom of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan as an unbiased and neutral establishment, like the two different branches of the state, considers the postponement of the elections as towards the provision of article 61 of the constitution
- The Supreme Courtroom understands the issues and challenges with all their dimensions that the Unbiased Election Fee faces in monetary, safety and logistical areas.
- The Supreme Courtroom can also be conscious of and respects the viewpoint of a gaggle of commentators and presidential candidates who’ve recognised the postponement of sound, democratic, common and truthful election course of as justified.
- Subsequently, the Supreme Courtroom in view of the above points, reviewed and analysed the query as referred from the textual content and spirit of article 61 of the structure and presents its opinion as bellow considering the goal state of affairs and the supreme interests of the country and in mild of legal muyyeds:
As it’s clear, paragraph two of article 61 of the constitution stipulates the finish of presidential time period on first Jawza of the fifth yr after the elections however meanwhile the constitution ties the above paragraph to the subsequent paragraphs which says: “elections to determine a new president shall be held 30 to 60 days before the end of the presidential term.”
As we see, each when it comes to the spirit and logic of the regulation and when it comes to the phrasing, these two paragraphs are complimentary to one another which signifies that after the finish of the presidential elections [to be held] inside 30 to 60 days to the first Jawza of the fifth yr, the president time period ends and this clearly indicates that before the finish of the presidential term, the presidential elections should have been carried out and accomplished and the individual to whom the presidency ought to be handed because of the elections ought to have been elected, whereas the current  state of affairs is towards it. So the solely scientific and logical answer, [which is] in consonance with the supreme pursuits of the country and based mostly on a jurisprudential rule (baqa ma kana ala ma kana, observing the established order ante), is the continuation of the term of the president and his vice-presidents until elections, because with the postponement of the elections the truth is the provision of article 61 of the structure has been delayed as an entire, because the provision for a problem in a single article of the regulation cannot be divisible, in a method [to say that] delay is allowed in one paragraph [in elections] however not in one other paragraph [end of the presidential term] despite the undeniable fact that they’re complimentary to each other. This evaluation along with the undeniable fact that it’s suitable with the wording of the structure in addition to with its spirit and logic and with jurisprudential rule can contribute to making sure national unity, stability in the nation. Subsequently, the Supreme Courtroom of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan expresses its views in this regard:
- Observing the text and spirit of the constitution talked about above
- Realising the issues and excuses that the Election Fee faces
- With a view to further guarantee stability and shield the supreme pursuits of the country
- And respecting the expectations and needs of the noble and Muslim individuals of Afghanistan in paving the ground for holding basic, truthful, sound and democratic election
Considers the continuation of the time period of the president and his vice-presidents till the election of a brand new president in the interests of the individuals and the system and in accordance with the spirit and evaluation of the structure and expresses its authorized and constructive opinion while approving and supporting it.”
Now contemplating that the current president’s question is the similar question made by the then-president to the Supreme Courtroom in the 2009 presidential elections. Since the situation in question has legal and government precedent and this ruling has been acted upon, the legal opinion of the Supreme Courtroom in view of the provisions of the regulation and given the excuses that the Election Fee of Afghanistan face is the similar opinion that had been offered by the excessive council of the then-Supreme Courtroom as a authorized precept in 2009. Subsequently, the earlier opinion of the high council of the Supreme Courtroom about the problem, [and] considering the provision of paragraph six of article 104 of the electoral regulation revealed in the official gazette 1226 dated 4/7/1395 (25 September 2016), was exactly permitted by the Supreme Courtroom of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.
(four) The office of the administrative affairs underneath former President Karzai had written that (as cited by the ICOIC in its 18 Might 2014 (obtainable here in Dari) that (AAN’s working translation):
Paragraph two of article 61 says that the presidential term ends on the first Jawza of the fifth yr. As it is clear, the outcomes of the 1393 (2014) elections haven’t been clarified but and, on the different hand, a number of days are left to the first Jawza of the fifth yr after the elections as enshrined in article 61 of the structure. On the other hand, if the elections go to a second round, extra time will be needed to carry the runoff and till the announcement of the results and election of a brand new president. So to be able to forestall the violation of the structure and discover a affordable answer to the situation, the problem is referred to you so that you assessment it and supply legal advice to the president.
(5) The OICIC offered the following causes for its determination: First, the continuation of the then-incumbent president’s time period prevents a power vacuum. Second, there isn’t a better various to the continuation of the then-president’s term inside the constitutional framework. Third, because continuation of the then-incumbent president’s term is the continuation of an elected power, which is more democratic than another technique (which may have been adopted to exchange it); fourth, this (the delay in completing the elections inside the constitutional timeframe) is the closest to a state of emergency when it comes to similarity, throughout which elections are delayed and the presidential term is prolonged (this is perhaps referring to article 147, which sets forth that if the presidential or parliamentary term expires during the state of emergency, new basic elections shall be postponed and their terms will be extended for up to four months. Nevertheless, the state of emergency, in response to article 143 and declared by the president, ought to be endorsed by the Nationwide Meeting).
Article 147 of the constitution reads:
If the presidential time period or the legislative term of the Nationwide Meeting expires throughout the state of emergency, the new common elections shall be postponed, and the presidential, in addition to parliamentary terms, shall prolong as much as 4 months.
If the state of emergency continues for greater than 4 months, the President shall name the Loya Jirga.
Inside 2 months after the termination of the state of emergency, elections shall be held.
(6) This led to speculation on the social media that the Supreme Courtroom may need deliberately omitted to make any mention of the workplace of the chief government to permit the president to dissolve it(see for example, Abdul Ali Muhammadi, a former legal adviser to President Ghani, commenting that “with the approval of the high council of the Supreme Court, the office of the chief executive will be closed after 22 May”). A day after the Supreme Courtroom’s ruling was revealed by the media, on 22 April, a pretend decree (as though issued by President Ghani) as though leaked to the Pajhwok News Agency was circulated on social media indicating that the workplace of the chief government had been dissolved by the president and a group had been appointed to transfer its properties to the presidential palace. The workplace of second Vice-President Danesh wrote: “Today the text of a presidential decree about dissolution of the office of the chief executive of the National Unity Government, citing some news agency, was published on the social media and caused a concern for the public opinion. This news is totally fake and baseless and denied.”