Supreme Court seeks intelligence report on PTI long march

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court Wednesday ordered the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and other relevant authorities to submit a report to the court explaining whether the judiciary's orders were violated in May 25 Islamabad riots.

The apex court issued the directive 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 Azadi March.

"We expect that the high functionaries of the executive throughout the country and the top leadership of the PTI and other political parties shall abide and settle a fair code of securing a free, fair, and peaceful political activity in the country leading to the holding of the national election,” the court said.

“We accordingly consider that the purpose of this petition filed by the Islamabad High Court Bar Association has been served and the same has borne fruit. It has, therefore, become infructuous. Accordingly, we dispose of the same as having become infructuous.”

A five-member bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsen, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Sayyed Mazahir Ali Akbar Naqvi, announced the judgment.

The judgment authored by Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial held that "by acting upon assurances given on behalf of the top leadership of PTI and issuing directions to the government, our order dated May 25, 2022, created a balance between the mutual rights and obligations of the protesting people, the ordinary public and the duties of the state. This balance was recorded in good faith by the court whilst trusting the representations made on behalf of the two opposing parties before it."

"We are disappointed to note that the bona fide effort made by the court was disrespected. "Although, it was meant to create a harmony between the two opposing sides for the sake of protecting public interest and the constitutional rights of the people, such order was passed by trusting the representations made and assurances given to the court.

"The judicial trust reposed by the court in the parties before it confers moral legitimacy and authority upon their actions. The resulting high moral ground lends credibility to the entitlement and to the propriety of actions taken by such parties.

“In the present case, to say the least, the moral high ground held by the parties has diminished because public rights, interests, and property of the disinterested public have been breached and damaged badly.

“In the foregoing background the AGP argued that having agreed to hold the PTI rally at the ground in the H-9/G-9 area of Islamabad as recorded by the order of the court, Mr Imran Khan shortly thereafter instructed PTI supporters to reach D-Chowk in the Red Zone of Islamabad.

“To establish this retraction a video recording of Mr Imran Khan’s statement made after the passing of the above said order was played on the multimedia screen before the court. “He contended that in the above circumstances, Mr Imran Khan appears to have invited his supporters to dishonor the assurance given on his behalf to the court.

"As a result, private and public properties were damaged and destroyed. Some trees in the greenbelt of Blue Area of Islamabad were put on fire. Thirty one police officers were injured by the stones pelted by the crowd and Article 245 of the Constitution had to be invoked in the middle of the night by calling the armed forces in aid of civil power.

"The learned AGP accordingly requested the court to take action against Mr Imran Khan for breach of his assurances given to the court. "Finally, the AGP informed that Mr Imran Khan had issued a statement in the morning at a location on Jinnah Avenue (leading to D-Chowk) that after witnessing the teargas shelling by the law-enforcement agencies he will not proceed with the sit-in at D-Chowk and he gave six days' time to the government to dissolve the assemblies and announce a date for elections.

“It is apparent that the assurances conveyed to the court by the learned counsel for the top leadership of the PTI may have been dishonoured by the workers/supporters/sympathizers of the party by proceeding to the D-Chowk in the Red Zone area and by allegedly committing acts of arson and destruction of public and private properties on the way.

“However, we note that in the early morning, Mr. Imran Khan reached Jinnah Avenue leading to D-Chowk and announced the postponement of his sit-in at Islamabad for six days. As a result, further damage to property or injury to human life has been averted.

“Nevertheless, there remains the lurking question whether the responsibility for the events comprising reckless acts of mob anger can be blamed upon the senior leadership of the PTI. “So far, there is no evidence or allegation that such acts were committed on the instigation of any party or happened randomly.

“At its most elementary level, the PTI leader appears to have assured the holding of a political rally at the G-9/H-9 ground and therefore not to assemble and sit in another venue including at D-Chowk in G-5 Islamabad.

“However, the AGP claims that the PTI workers and supporters moved forward to the D-Chowk area in response to the call made by their leader. “Notwithstanding the said request by the AGP, we exercise restraint for the time being for a number of reasons. Firstly, Mr. Imran Khan has called off the rally/public meeting that gives a recess to the charged mob witnessed last night.

“Secondly, prudence advises that time be given for sanity to prevail among the stakeholders. “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 was directed that the IGP of ICT, the Chief Commissioner of ICT, the secretary of the Ministry of Interior, the Director General of Intelligence Bureau, the Director General of ISI shall file reports answering, inter alia, the following questions:

a) At what time did Mr. Imran Khan make the announcement for party workers to reach D-Chowk?

b) When, where and how did the crowd cross the barricade to enter a hitherto closed area?

c) Was the crowd entering the Red Zone organised or supervised or did it move randomly?

d) Were there any acts of provocation or breach of assurance by the government?

e) Was any action or treatment meted out by the ICT police against the protesters disproportionate to the actual or perceived wrong committed by the protesters?

f) 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 protesters?

Did any protester/party worker reach the G-9/ H-9 ground?

g) How many civilians were injured/killed/ hospitalised/arrested?

“The said reports shall be filed within one week for perusal in chambers by the learned members of this larger bench.

“There is 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/undertaking given to the court and recorded in our order dated May 25m 2022, ought to be initiated and against whom. It may be observed that the disregard of assurances/undertakings given to the court involves separate proceedings from the present one.

“Therefore, the prayer made by the learned AGP in these proceedings is misconceived.

“Accordingly, CMA No.3447 of 2022 is dismissed. For independent proceedings to be maintained, relevant and credible material must be presented to the court for it to foregoing limitations on the rights granted by the Constitution empower the state to take only such reasonable, proportionate and lawful action that is necessary in aid of public interest and public order so that public place, public life and property are not disturbed, disrupted or destroyed.”

Meanwhile, Justice Yahya Afridi in a separate note added some observations on the maintainability of the very prayer made by the learned Attorney-General for Pakistan in his miscellaneous application.

The judge noted that the learned Attorney-General for Pakistan has, in the application, after alleging violation of the court order dated May 25, 2022, by the PTI leadership, made the following prayer: “This court may pass prohibitory and regulatory orders so as to allow the law enforcement agencies to take action against the miscreants including but not limited to causing arrest of the miscreants.”

“Indeed, it is a surprising prayer”, Justice Afridi noted, adding that the learned Attorney-General for Pakistan, who is the principal law officer of the federal government, has asked this court to pass “prohibitory and regulatory orders” to maintain the law and order in Pakistan.

“The prayer made is against the very principle of trichotomy of powers enshrined in our Constitution, which has assigned separate roles to the three organs of the state: the legislature, the executive and the judicature”, Justice Yahya Afridi said, adding that to maintain law and order in the country is the domain and mandate of the executive. Thus, Justice Afridi said that the very prayer is contrary to the constitutional mandate and is, therefore, not legally entertainable. “However, with profound respect, I disagree that there is no credible material before this court for initiating independent contempt proceedings against Imran Khan, who allegedly disobeyed the court order dated May 25, 2022,” Justice Afridi said.