ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has said that negotiations like the ones the government held with leaders of the Tehreek-i-Labbaik Ya Rasoolullah (TLY) to end its 20-day sit-in at the Faizabad Interchange encourage protesters to try to take over the capital and paralyse state functions in a bid to pressurise the government for the acceptance of their demands.

The observation came during the hearing by a two-judge SC bench headed by Justice Mushir Alam of a suo motu case about the use of abusive language by the TLYR leaders in their speeches during the sit-in.

When court deplored the absence of preventive measures to deal with Faizabad-like situations in future, Attorney General Ashtar Ausaf informed it that a draft Anti-Riot Protection Bill 2018, aimed at dealing with such situations in future, was expected to be taken up by the federal cabinet at its next meeting on Tuesday.

The AG conceded that Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code was not enough to prevent such circumstances.

The apex court expressed dissatisfaction over the reports submitted by the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) on the Faizabad sit-it and said it lacked information on many counts.

Says such approach encourages protesters to take over capital for acceptance of their demands

The AG, however, requested the court to remove the name of the ISI from the court order by explaining that taking preventing measures was not the job of the ISI, but of the administration. He said that any failure in this regard was that of the administration.

Deputy Attorney General Sohail Mahmood, who submitted a report on behalf of the ISI, informed the court that the TLYR was a registered political party and that it had not been included in the list of 64 banned groups by the interior ministry. The TLYR is also not among the four organisations which are under the watchlist or placed under surveillance though being monitored to check extremist tendencies.

Justice Mazhar Alam Miankhel, a member of the bench, however, wondered about any action against the leader of this registered political party.

Justice Alam questioned the absence of any action even after a group paralysed the entire government machinery. “Have we learnt any lesson from the incident?” he asked.

Islamabad DSP (legal) Azhar Shah surprised the court by stating that warrants had been issued against the TLYR head.

At this, the AG explained that a dispute of jurisdiction had arisen between the Islamabad and Rawalpindi police.

The AG sought time from the court with a commitment that he would personally talk to the Punjab prosecutor general to inquire about the status of actions taken against the people responsible for the sit-in.

Justice Miankhel regretted that the protest demonstration covered the entire distance from Lahore to Islamabad under the supervision of the government without any check.

The AG, however, explained that the leaders of the party had held out an assurance to the Punjab government that they would hold a demonstration, and not a sit-in, in Islamabad.

Meanwhile, the Islamabad police in a report stated that a new contingent of police/LEAs was being deployed on a daily basis and arrangements were being made for smooth flow of traffic on roads between the twin cities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad to discourage any interruption.

These arrangements have helped residents of the two cities in ameliorating their problems. The report said the main cause attributed to prolong sit-in was the peaceful dispersal of the protesters. Initially, the Islamabad’s district administration held negotiations to disperse the protesters peacefully.

The report said separate criminal cases had been registered against the party leadership and 12 individuals involved in the crime were arrested and sent to judicial custody. A temporary force of 570 officers has been set up and anti-riot training has started for orientation of the unit on a daily basis. The fresh recruitment process will be started in due course of time after the approval by the competent authority to strengthen the anti-riot unit within the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) police.

Moreover, the report says, water cannon has been provided to the ICT police and APC (armoured personnel carrier) vehicles have been prepared for utilisation in case of emergency to stop protesters forcibly from holding demonstrations at locations except the specified place — Democracy Park. Demonstrations in future will not be allowed to take place anywhere else.

The apex court was also infomed that 418 people had been arrested and 27 FIRs registered.

But in its order, the apex court regretted that no detail of challan, FIR or fate of cases before the trial court had so far been shared with it.

Senior counsel Hafiz S. A. Rehman, appearing on behalf of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulation Authority, informed the court that a complaint had been lodged with Pemra’s council of complaint against a private television channel for violating the code of conduct during the TLYR sit-it. The channel, he added, had sought 14 days to submit a reply to the complaint.

When the court was informed that the process of filling the post of the Pemra chairman had been initiated, it regretted that the process of such appointment should have started six months before the filling of the post, and if the position fell vacant due to some incidents then the appointment should be made within 90 days.

Published in Dawn, February 17th, 2018