ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Thursday dismissed PTI Chairman Imran Khan’s plea to stop the long march as futile.
Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandial, who headed a three-member bench hearing the case, said “it would be premature for the court to intervene in this matter […] the court will exercise judicial restraint in such political matters.” Justice Athar Minullah and Justice Ayesha Malik.
JUI(F) Senator Kamran Murtaza had approached the court last week to stop the long march, but the Supreme Court told him that he can file a fresh petition if the law and order situation deteriorates.
PTI’s long march is moving forward with each passing day and the government has warned the party against indulging in violence after entering the capital – which is expected by this week. However, the party has assured that it will not indulge in violence.
Today’s Hearing
At the start of the hearing, Murtaza said that it has been two weeks since Khan’s long march began, and according to PTI’s senior vice-president, it will reach Islamabad by this Friday.
The daily life of the people has been disrupted due to the long march, PTI reserves the right to hold long march, but it will not be allowed to disrupt the life of the common man in any way.
On this, Justice Ayesha asked the lawyer whether the government has introduced any mechanism to control the protest. Justice Minullah also asked Murtaza that do you think that the administration has become so weak that it cannot handle the long march?
“This is a matter for the executive [government], you should approach them,” Justice Minullah told Murtaza. As he noted, the court can intervene in exceptional circumstances.
Why should the courts interfere when the administration has the authority to control the long march? He thought.
In response, Murtaza said that now matters have gone out of hand because one person lost his life in Wazirabad during the long march and Khan was also injured.
Justice Ayesha then asked the petitioner that the long march has been going on for so many days, did he approach the district administration?
‘Difficult Situation’
Chief Justice Bandyal in his remarks told Murtaza that he had referred to the violations of the previous long march and asked the court to intervene in the matter. “But the Long March is a political problem, it also has a political solution.”
He told the petitioner that when the judiciary gets involved in political matters, it creates a “difficult situation” for the court.
“You have also referred to an audio leak in your petition. The audio has a discussion about bringing weapons to Islamabad, whether this audio is genuine or not, there is a possibility that the law and order situation may be affected. is,” said the Chief Justice.
He then questioned whether the PTI had brought arms during its march in Islamabad on May 25 as he noted that political parties should observe certain limits during protests.
Chief Justice Bandyal said that since the court was told that March is still in Punjab, did the petitioner approach the provincial government? And if not, can the court intervene if there is a disconnection between the center and the provinces?
Justice Minullah then told Murtaza that he was a senator and should work to strengthen Parliament. On this the JUI(F) leader said that I am present in the court in a personal capacity.
“How can we be sure you are here in a private capacity when you are also part of the government?” Justice Minullah asked. Murtaza said that it seemed that the administration could not control the situation, that’s why he chose to go to court.
‘Before Time’
On this, the Chief Justice said that prima facie, the court’s intervention in the matter would be “premature”.
Justice Minullah then asked Murtaza if he wanted the court to play the role of Deputy Commissioner.
Justice Ayesha then informed Murtaza that the contempt of court case against Khan was already pending in the larger bench of the Supreme Court.
“The parties in the contempt case have given an assurance that they will be held accountable if there is any violation. So do you still want this bench to interfere when a larger bench is already hearing the case?”
Justice Minullah also noted that a similar case is already pending in the Islamabad High Court (IHC).
‘Are you Afraid?’
The Chief Justice remarked that PTI had sought permission to hold a rally on May 25 at the H9 ground.
“When the administration refused to provide H9 ground, the Supreme Court intervened,” he said.
Chief Justice Bandyal said that despite the booking of the H9 ground, the crowd moved towards D Chowk. “Are you afraid that an incident like May 25 may happen again?” he asked.
On this, the Additional Attorney General told the court that the administration asked the PTI to hold a rally in Rawat. He said that the administration had sought a reply from PTI in an affidavit which has not yet been filed.
A similar case is also pending in the IHC, the official said.
The Chief Justice remarked that if there is a clear threat of constitutional violation, the court will intervene.
Meanwhile, JUI(F) Senator Murtaza said that the petition referred to past constitutional violations.
On this, the Chief Justice remarked that the other party may have a stand on the violation.
He said that after the violation of the order of the Supreme Court, the matter becomes complicated for the court. Court orders are meant to be obeyed.
Submission
In his petition, JUI(F) Senator Murtaza claimed that the PTI chairman seemed to be on a collision course with the Pakistani establishment as the party once again made its “long march” to Islamabad. has been
Senator Murtaza held the federal and provincial governments, Khan and his party accountable.
The petition requested the Supreme Court to ensure that the fundamental rights of the people are not violated during the long march.
The petition requested the court to order the provinces and the federation to ensure that the population of Islamabad is restricted for PTI protests/ sit-ins.
The court was also requested to direct the Islamabad Capital Territory and provincial authorities not to allow the Long March to continue the protest indefinitely.
The petition requested the court to also order the PTI to implement the code of conduct for holding protest rallies.
