A three-member bench of the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, will on Sept. 28 (Thursday) resume hearing a set of review petitions against the court’s ruling on the Tehreek-e-Labaik Pakistan (TLP)’s 2017 dharna at Faizabad, Islamabad.
Apart from the CJP, the bench hearing pleas moved by the Defense Ministry, Intelligence Bureau, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, Sheikh Rashid Ahmed and PEMRA comprises Justices Aminud Din Khan and Athar Minallah.
The original verdict, penned by Justice Isa prior to taking oath as CJP, had directed the Defense Ministry and the tri-services chiefs to penalize any security personnel, especially members of intelligence agencies, found to have violated their oath. It had further directed the federal government to monitor individuals advocating hate, extremism and terrorism and prosecute them in accordance with law.
The ruling had also slammed various government departments for not resolving the situation in a speedy manner, as the sit-in had virtually paralyzed life in Islamabad and Rawalpindi for 20 days. “Every citizen and political party has the right to assemble and protest provided such assembly and protest is peaceful and complies with the law imposing reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order,” it had read. “The right to assemble and protest is circumscribed only to the extent that it infringes on the fundamental rights of others, including their right to free movement and to hold and enjoy property.”
The review petition filed by the Defense Ministry had argued there was no evidence linking the armed forces to either the sit-in or the outcome of the 2018 general elections. It had also requested the court to set aside any explicit or implicit observations about the armed forces and the ISI, claiming that “hostile foreign intelligence agencies” had spread a “false perception” that Pakistan and its armed forces were aiding or supporting extremist organizations in the region.
The Intelligence Bureau’s review petition, meanwhile, had urged the court to set aside its observations against the department, arguing that the ruling had created a “bad impression” on the public that it was exceeding its mandate and was involved in unlawful activities and politics. It claimed that during the sit-in, it had been in contact with both the federal and Punjab governments, and had warned them about the TLP’s plans.
The PTI’s petition had criticized a reference to its 2014 dharna in the verdict. “The impression one gets from it [reference] was that the party conducted an illegal protest for publicity and deliberately made wrong allegations,” it argued, and urged the court to expunge these remarks.
Sheikh Rashid Ahmed had sought the removal of his name from the ruling’s paragraph 4, which had referred to an ISI report as describing him as a “supporter” of the TLP protest.