ISLAMABAD, Jun 01 (APP): The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought reports from the agencies over the alleged involvement of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leaders in instigating party workers to reach Islamabad’s D-Chowk in violation of its May 25 order.
Besides agencies, the apex courts issued these directives to the Inspector General of Police Islamabad, Interior Secretary and others in a written order on the plea filed by the Islamabad High Court Bar Association (IHCBA) against the government’s decision to block roads to stop the PTI’s long march.
The written order issued by majority members of the larger bench led by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial stated: “In any event, facts and materials need to be collected to establish the sequence of events, the identity of the perpetrators and of the instigators, if any. At this stage therefore it is directed that the IGP ICT, the Chief Commissioner ICT, the Secretary Ministry of Interior, the Director General Intelligence Bureau, and the Director General ISI shall file reports answering the questions.”
The order asked the executive authorities to apprise as at what time did PTI Chairman Imran Khan make the announcement for party workers to reach D-Chowk.
“When, where and how did the crowd cross the barricade to enter a hitherto closed area. Was the crowd entering the Red Zone organised or supervised or did it move randomly? Were there any acts of provocation or breach of assurance by the government? Was any action or treatment meted out by the ICT (Islamabad Capital Territory) Police against the protesters disproportionate to the actual or perceived wrong committed by the protesters?” the court questioned.
The court also asked how many protesters managed to enter the Red Zone. “Which security arrangements, if any, were relaxed by the executive authorities? Whether any security barrier cordons were broken or breached by protestors? Did any protestor/party worker reach the G-9/ H-9 ground? How many civilians were injured, killed, hospitalised or arrested?”
The order stated that the reports should be filed within one week for perusal in chambers by the bench members.
However, one bench member Justice Yahya Afridi dissented from the majority opinion by saying there was sufficient material available to initiate a contempt proceeding against former prime minister Imran Khan over violation of the May 25 order.
There was a need for verification of, inter alia, factual aspects of the events that occurred in order for the court to evaluate and decide whether action for violation of assurances/ undertakings given to the court and recorded in its order dated May 25 ought to be initiated and against whom, he added.
Justice Afridi observed that the disregard of assurances and undertakings given to the court involved separate proceedings from the present one.
He also noted that directions to executive authorities in its May 25 order was to protect the constitutional rights of the people of Pakistan as guaranteed in Article 15, “which secures the right of free movement, and Article 16, which protects their right of freedom of assembly”.
Justice Afridi maintained that the freedom of movement could be subjected to reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the public interest and the freedom of assembly might be regulated by similar restrictions applied in the interest of public order.
He said the judicial trust reposed by the court in the parties before it conferred moral legitimacy and authority upon their actions.
He said the court expected that the high functionaries of the executive throughout the country and the top leadership of the PTI and other political parties would abide and settle a fair code of securing free, fair, and peaceful political activity in the country leading to the holding of the national election.
Justice Afridi stated that any violation of the balance envisaged in that behalf by the Constitution and the law was cognisable by the competent courts for enforcement.
The court also disposed of the IHCBA’s petition in this connection.
