September 07, 2007	Friday	Sha'aban 24, 1428

KARACHI, Sept 6: A seven-member bench of the Sindh High Court asked the town police officers and station house officers of the city areas where trouble occurred on May 12 to file their affidavits.

Deputy Attorney-General Rizwan Ahmed Siddiqui was asked to produce the federal interior secretary secretary’s affidavit whether the Karachi situation came up for discussion in the federal cabinet before or after May 12.

Joint Secretary Rashid Mazari, who appeared for the ministry, was not aware of any cabinet discussion. He filed a statement saying that the ministry had nothing to do with the May 12 events in Karachi.

Insofar as the Rangers were concerned, the joint secretary submitted a 1995 notification renewed from year to year assigning their services to the Sindh government as a backup reserve force for deployment in contingencies. The force works under the provincial government control. The DAG also filed a reply on behalf of the Civil Aviation Authority saying that domestic and international flights were cancelled on May 12 and that the passengers could not reach the airport.

Provincial home secretary Ghulam Mohammad Mohatram was asked to submit the original letter carrying home adviser Waseem Akhtar’s permission for a Muttahida Qaumi Movement rally on May 12 or file a personal affidavit if it was not traceable. Advocate Habibur Rahman submitted a copy of the city district government permission for the MQM rally granted by the city nazim through the district co-ordination officer.

Advocate Khwaja Naveed Ahmed produced the Karachi Port Trust record relating to the entry of containers on May 13. He made a grievance that he was roughed up by some slogan-chanting lawyers in the bar room during the tea-break.The bench asked him to submit a complaint in writing.

The KPT had already produced its record about the exit of containers on May 11 and 12. Television channels Geo and Aaj produced the CDs of the relevant talk shows. The respondents’ counsel requested for copies.

Adjournment plea rejected

The bench peremptorily rejected a short adjournment plea by special Sindh government counsel Raja Qureshi, saying that all cases before its members had been discharged and they had no other work to do on Friday.

It also clarified that the proceedings were no longer suo motu as the SHC registrar’s report to the chief justice had been converted into a petition. However, they were still not ‘adversarial’.

The lawyer said he required time to produce translated versions of all the 54 FIRs registered in connection with the May 12 events. Whatever the nature of proceedings, Raja Qureshi argued, the court could not conduct a factual inquiry under its writ jurisdiction.

The bench observed that there were few disputed facts as the respondents were not denying the occurrence of violence and other happenings on May 12.

The counsel said the main question was whether the government officials’ acts of omission or commission on May 12 were warranted and it was wide open. For instance, nowhere had it been said that rioters were tear-gassed on May 12.

Amicus Curiae Qazi Faez Isa said the shells were fired by plainclothesmen.

“This too is a question of fact,” Advocate Qureshi said. The bench remarked that the main issue was whether law was enforced.

Relying on the May 11 court record, the counsel stated that the home secretary had informed all concerned, including the Supreme Court and SHC registrars, that according to the intelligence reports, the opposition and ruling parties were planning rallies on the arrival of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry and violent clashes, even ‘bloodshed’, could occur.

May 12 (Saturday) was a working day and the arrival was scheduled for 11.45am. The CJ was to be provided security at every cost and it was in the larger public interest that a request was made for the postponement of his visit.

His hosts, the SHC Bar Association and the Karachi Bar Association, Mr Qureshi said, were contacted to take security measures but they failed to specify the CJ’s route. The lawyers assured that party processions would be kept away but there was no way to ensure the VVIP’s security in the politically-charged atmosphere.

Asked by the bench why the MQM was allowed to take out a rally from ‘zero point to Keamari’, the counsel said it was for the respective counsel to answer. Besides, the permission made no difference as other parties were bringing out rallies from various points.

Summing up his submissions earlier, Advocate Faez Isa said all officials responsible for the May 12 violence should be disqualified from holding any public office. Those seen indulging in violence in the TV footage should be traced through wide publicity with or without reward. An independent public prosecutor with plenary powers should be appointed to investigate the bloodshed.

‘Gujarat-like massacre’

He likened the May 12 violence to the massacre of Muslims in the state of Gujarat and extensively cited the Indian Supreme Court judgment in the Best Bakery case, which also contained strictures against the state high court.

Referring to Articles 5 and 6 of the Constitution, he said those responsible for the May 12 events were guilty of subversion and treason. Ignoring protests by the respondents’ lawyers, he said what happened in Karachi on May 12 was, in fact, a conspiracy against Pakistan.

He urged the respondents’ counsel, particularly law officers, to assist the court as they belonged to the legal profession and were not members of an alien race.

The lawyer said there was no provision in the Constitution for the appointment of advisers at the provincial level.

The bench asked him whether it was appropriate to delve into the constitutional validity of the (home) adviser’s appointment in the present proceedings. Mr Isa said the question had already been decided by the Lahore High Court.

He also argued that under the rules of business, verbal orders were unlawful and every order must be reduced to writing. Officials not knowing rules had no business to hold their posts. The blockade of Sharea Faisal was a particularly treasonable act as the Pakistan Army and Navy had their headquarters there, the lawyer said.

Extensively quoting from the Quaid-i-Azam’s speeches, he said the foremost duty of a government was to maintain law and order and that government servants should remain impartial. Together with his address to the Constituent Assembly on August 11, 1947, the Quaid’s speeches constituted the ideology of Pakistan.

He said the respondent officials were also guilty of violating the efficiency and discipline rules and merited dismissal under the Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance.

SHCBA Secretary Munirur Rehman, Sindh Bar Council member Haleem Siddiqui on behalf SBC vice-chairman Amin Lakhani and Ashraf Samejo on behalf of the Malir District Bar Association said the lawyers were prevented from going to the airport. The last-mentioned, who said a vehicle displaying MQM flag fired at lawyers at Malir, was asked by the bench to lodge a complaint with the police station concerned and inform it the official concerned was reluctant to register a case as alleged by him.

The bench, which consists of Justices Sarmad Jalal Osmany, Anwar Zaheer Jamali, Mushir Alam, Azizullah M. Memon, Khilji Arif Hussain, Maqbool Baqar and Ali Sain Dino Metlo, will continue hearing Raja Qureshi’s arguments on Friday.