SC declines govt request to restrain Imran from holding long march

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined a federal government request for an interim order to restrain the Tehreek-i-Insaf Chairman Imran Khan from holding a long march.

A five-member larger bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsen, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, heard the contempt petition filed by the interior ministry.

The ministry had filed a petition in the apex court praying for the initiation of contempt proceedings under Article 204 of the Constitution against PTI chief Imran Khan for flouting and disregarding the orders of the apex court passed on May 25, 2022 in the petition filed by the Islamabad High Court Bar Association.

It had prayed for the passing of appropriate orders for the implementation of the apex court’s orders of May 26 and protection of the fundamental rights of public at large, particularly the residents of twin cities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. On Wednesday, the court issued simple notices to former prime minister Imran Khan, Babar Awan, and Faisal Chaudhry, the counsel for the PTI chairman.

 Ata Bandial said that, at present, they will not issue contempt notices or show cause notices in the instant matter. “Let Imran Khan submit a reply. Only then will we decide on whether his actions constituted a contempt of court or not,” the chief justice said, adding that they wanted to hear the respondent’s (Imran Khan’s) stance on the allegations of the government. The court directed PTI Chairman Imran Khan to submit his reply over the violation of the court’s May 25 order, which restricted the party from holding its march near the Peshawar Morr between the H-9 and G-9 areas of Islamabad. The court also directed its office to provide the PTI chairman and his counsel copies of the agencies’ reports and the interior ministry’s application regarding the violation of May 25 order. During the hearing, Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial said that factual aspects of the matter needed to be ascertained. Earlier, Additional Attorney General Aamir Rehman informed the court that, as per available evidence, PTI Chairman Imran Khan had violated the order passed by the apex court on May 25, 2022.

The chief justice asked the law officer at what time the PTI chairman had called his followers to reach the D-Chowk. Aamir Rehman said that the court’s order came on May 25 at 6pm, while the PTI chairman had asked the marchers to move towards D Chowk at 6:50pm, adding that another announcement was made at 9:54pm. He recalled that initially, the PTI had requested permission to stage a sit-in on the Srinagar Highway, but later on, Imran Khan asked his followers to reach D-Chowk.

The law officer said that this was before the court had issued orders not to march towards the D-Chowk. Chaudhry Aamir Rehman submitted that after the respondent Imran Khan gave the call, his party leaders, including Dr. Shireen Mazari, Fawad Chaudhry, and Sadaqat Abbasi, also gave calls to reach the D-Chowk, followed by Usman Dar, Shahbaz Gill and Saifullah Niazi giving calls to the followers. The AAG claimed that the PTI chairman, while calling for reaching D-Chowk, had violated the court’s order and was liable to be proceeded against under contempt of court, as he crossed the allocated area, reached the Jinnah Avenue, and then finally ended his rally. Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial said that the counsel for the respondent had earlier given assurances to the court on behalf of the party’s head. The CJP said that in his address, the PTI chairman had said that the apex court had ordered the removal of blockades, which means that he had been intimated of the court’s order by his party leaders. “But the main question is what was told to the PTI chairman,” the CJP said, adding that it would be appropriate to ask the counsel to clarify the position.

Aamir Rehman recalled that Babar Awan and Faisal Chaudhry had held out an assurance to the court on behalf of the PTI chairman, stating that there would be no blockades of roads and the participants in the rally would not cross the allocated location. The chief justice said that enough material was available in the reports submitted by the Islamabad IGP, the chief commissioner, and intelligence agencies.

“Therefore, let the respondent (PTI chairman) submit his reply over the material mentioned in the reports,” the CJP remarked and issued notices to Imran Khan and his counsel, adding that Imran Khan would not be required to personally appear before the court even if the notice was issued. The chief justice said that the court adheres to the rule of law, which must be ensured, adding that they don’t want to make headlines. The court rejected the AAG’s plea for summoning of Imran Khan in person.

During the hearing, the chief justice said that nobody could be deprived of the right to hold a peaceful protest. The CJP said that the government is authorised to take action if the law is violated, but it is also required to take effective measures to protect the peaceful marchers. The chief justice said that the court only wants to ensure that there is no violation of the rule of law and the Constitution. The chief justice said that the court should not intervene in political affairs, adding that for resolving political disputes, Parliament is the appropriate forum.

“We can neither call the political strategy of Imran Khan good nor bad, but nobody should be allowed to cause damage to public or private properties,” the CJP remarked.

Chief Justice Bandial said that they had ruled in their judgment that assemblies could not be dissolved during the no-confidence motion, adding that whatever happened after dismissing the ruling of the deputy speaker of the National Assembly was a political process. According to the CJP, the Supreme Court’s pen cannot be used as a stick. Later, the court adjourned the hearing until Oct. 31.