ISLAMABAD: The lawyer representing the Lal Masjid surprised the Supreme Court on Thursday when he said he was not concerned with the withdrawal of 20 kanals of land, allotted by the civic body to Maulana Abdul Aziz.

“We are not concerned with any agreement or allotment of any land,” advocate Tariq Asad said while arguing that the authorities had failed to comply with an Oct 2, 2007 judgement that contained a number of directions from the Supreme Court.

A two-judge SC bench, headed by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, had taken up a set of petitions against killings on the premises of the Lal Masjid and Jamia Hafsa during the July 2007 military operation.

The Lal Masjid conflict began when students from Jamia Hafsa occupied the adjacent Children’s Library on Jan 22, 2007 in response to the razing of seven unauthorised mosques by the city administration.

Advocate Tariq Asad says he’s ‘not concerned’ with 20 kanals that was allotted to Maulana Abdul Aziz for construction of hostel, seminary

The confrontation built up over the next month and erupted into armed clashes that led to the death of a Rangers official on Jul 3, 2007 due to gunfire from the mosque.

The army was called in the same night and paramilitary forces stormed the mosque after the suspension of water and electricity to the mosque failed to subdue the alleged militants inside.

At a previous hearing, on May 4, the court ordered the government to explain what steps it had taken to comply with its earlier judgement.

One of the directions in the judgement was that the Capital Development Authority (CDA) consider constructing a hostel, seminary and a research centre for students at Jamia Hafsa.

Mr Asad argued that the order does not talk about the allotment of land, but rather the construction of the aforementioned buildings. He said the land has been transferred to an individual, Mr Aziz.

“Apparently, it seems two groups have been formed,” Deputy Attorney General Sohail Mehmood observed, which he said was a problem.

Mr Mehmood explained that after a series of meetings an agreement was executed between the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) administration and the Jamia Hafsa management on Dec 29, 2011, under which 20 kanals of land in H-11/4 were transferred.

The purpose of the agreement was to construct a seminary, research centre and hostel for Jamia Hafsa students in lieu of the land adjacent to the Markazi Jamia Masjid – Lal Masjid – that was previously in use.

He said it was also agreed that all the land previously used by Jamia Hafsa by used solely as a prayer ground of the Lal Masjid, with the condition that it is not used for any other purpose – institutional or residential.

The DAG also insisted that compensation, or blood money, to the legal heirs of innocent people killed in the operation had been paid.

Mr Asad, however, argued that over 100 people were killed and compensation for their deaths had not been paid.

At this, the court asked who would determine what the precise number of students studying there was, and how many of them were students and how many were militants.

Mr Mehmood pleaded before the court that the case had been heard a number of times, and various orders had been passed. He asked the court to give space so he could collect all the previous orders to establish the total number of innocent people killed.

The court admitted that the DAG’s submission was not without any foundation because a series of orders in the case had been passed earlier.

Before postponing proceedings for a month, the court order the DAG to furnish a comprehensive reply after detailed scrutiny of earlier directions of the court in the Lal Masjid case, a copy of which should also be handed over to Mr Asad.

Mr Mehmood told the court that 103 people died in the 2007 operation, including 89 militants, 11 law enforcement officials and three civilians.

Of the 89 deceased militants, 73 were handed over to their legal heirs while 16 were unidentified and had been buried in the H-11 graveyard on a trust basis.

With respect to the 73 identified bodies, the investigating team had recorded the statements of 67 legal heirs while the statements of 6 heirs could not be recorded as they were residing in harsh areas.

Published in Dawn, May 13th, 2016