ISLAMABAD: The Balochistan Bar Council and other provincial bar associations on Tuesday opposed the interior ministry’s request to expunge certain findings against Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan from the Jus­tice Qazi Faez Isa commission rep­o­rt on the Quetta Civil Hospital bombing.

“The relief so claimed is not justiciable under the law as the minister has not written or expressed any personal grievance nor has [he] approached the apex court in his personal capacity,” argued a rejoinder submitted jointly by senior counsel Hamid Khan on behalf of the Balochistan Bar Council, the Balochistan High Court Bar and the Balochistan Bar Association.

On Feb 6, the Supreme Court had hinted that it may soften certain findings of the Justice Isa commission report provided the Balochistan High Court bar associations concurred with the proposal.

The critical report had regretted Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan’s meeting with Maulana Moham­mad Ahmed Ludhianvi, the head of the banned Sipah-i-Sahaba Pakistan, Millat-i-Islamia and Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat, on Oct 21 last year.

In the rejoinder, the provincial bar council said the present government had no right to rule the country because they had admitted their failure to ensure the protection of citizen’s life and security, which was a fundamental right of the citizens and the prime responsibility of the government.

The performance of the present government was no better than the previous government, the bar associations said, adding that the provincial government, police, local administration and Frontier Corps and the intelligence agencies had failed to put appropriate security measures in place and also failed to prevent the horrific attack on Aug 8.

The rejoinder wondered why the interior ministry did not proceed against terrorist organisations such as the Jamaatul Ahrar — a Taliban faction — despite the fact that it claimed responsibility for the incident. Why had the federal government been hesitant to ban such organisations, the rejoinder asked, adding that there were serious questions about the commitment of the interior ministry.

The rejoinder also suggested that a contempt of court application could be moved against the interior minister for his Dec 18, 2016 press conference, where he had declared the findings of the Quetta commission “one-sided”.

It said there was no case for expunging the remarks against the interior minister, especially when neither the ministry nor the National Counter Ter­ror­i­sm Authority (Nacta) were performing their mandated functions under the law.

The rejoinder claimed that the ministry had failed to perform its role in controlling the law and order situation, adding that though the interior minister boasted about his so-called efforts, the record suggested otherwise, something that was correctly observed by the Quetta commission.

The commission’s observations on the performance of the interior ministry and the minister were correct and based on an appraisal of the relevant facts, the available material and admissions of officers who appeared before the commission on behalf of the interior ministry.

Without referring to or pointing out any document on the record, the ministry levelled unsubstantiated allegations against the commission and that allegations with no substance deserved to be rejected by the Supreme Court, the rejoinder emphasised.

To save the minister from the consequences of his alleged criminal negligence, it appeared that the interior ministry was fabricating stories in hindsight in the face of a deteriorating law and order situation in the country, particularly in Balochistan.

The rejoinder also pointed out that officers of the interior ministry had admitted before the commission that no meeting of the Nacta Board of Directors, headed by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, had taken place.

Similarly, the executive commission, which is headed by the interior minister, has only met once.

Published in Dawn, March 8th, 2017