close
Saturday September 07, 2024

SHC moved against intelligence agency’s surveillance powers

By Jamal Khurshid
July 21, 2024
A view of facade of the Sindh High Court building in Karachi. — AFP/File
A view of facade of the Sindh High Court building in Karachi. — AFP/File

A petition was filed in the Sindh High Court, challenging the federal government’s decision to grant permission to intelligence agencies to intercept citizens’ calls and messages.

Advocate Abdul Ahad submitted in the petition that the federal government issued an SRO that empowered BS-18 or above officers of an intelligence agency to surveil citizens in the name of national security.

He submitted the home department also issued a notification authorizing the agency to nominate an officer not below rank of grade 18 to intercept calls and messages and trace calls through any telecommunication system under the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority Act.

He said the notification issued under the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) Act’s Section 54 was illegal and the Fair Trial Act 2013 had a complete mechanism for this matter.

He said articles 9 and 14 of the constitution protect the fundamental rights of privacy and dignity of the citizen and the impugned SRO is a clear violation of the constitutional rights of the citizens.

The petitioner requested the court to declare the impugned notification null and void and abuse of authority.

Missing persons:

The Sindh High Court dismissed a petition against alleged enforced disappearance of a citizen as the petitioner withdrew the petition by submitting that the citizen was shown arrested by the police.

Farzana Ghaffar had filed the petition against enforced disappearance of Bilal Haider, a seminary teacher, from the Qayyumabad area on July 8. She submitted that personnel of law enforcement agencies had picked up the detainee and his whereabouts were unknown.

The petitioner submitted that Counter Terrorism Department’s officials had confirmed arrest of Bilal Haider and she did not want to contest the petition as the whereabouts of the detainee were known now.

The court after taking the statement of the petitioner on record dismissed the petition as withdrawn.