• AGP says three-man panel consisting of former police officers will likely conclude probe in 60 days
• Sheikh Rashid ‘not telling the truth’, CJP Isa observes

ISLAMABAD: The federal government on Wednesday notified a commission to probe the Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) sit-in at Faizabad in 2017, superseding a ‘toothless’ fact-finding committee formed earlier.

Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan submitted the notification before the three-judge bench of the Supreme Court comprising Chief Justice of Pakis­tan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, Justice Amin­uddin Khan, and Justice Athar Minallah.

He also read out the terms of reference of the three-member commission, which said it would probe various aspects of TLP’s sit-in, including the involvement of officials of the intelligence agencies.

Former police officers Syed Akhtar Shah and Tahir Alam Khan, and Additional Interior Secretary Khushal Khan are members of the commission.

Justice Isa directed the AGP to amend the TORs by extending the probe to the appellants who approached the Supreme Court ‘en masse’ and are now withdrawing their appeals collectively. The commission has been directed to inquire as to whether the appellants filed the appe­als on their own or at someone’s behest.

The apex court, in its judgement of Feb 6, 2019, highlighted that under Section 211 of the Elections Act 2017 and Rules 161(2) of the Election Rules 2017, political parties were required to furnish to the fact-finding commission the list of contributors who donated or contributed an amount equal to or more than Rs100,000 to the political party for its election campaign expenses.

Earlier, the federal government has constituted a three-member committee comprising the additional defence secretary, additional interior secretary, and a director of the Inter-Services Intelli­ge­n­ce (ISI) to launch an inquiry into the matters mentioned in the judgement.

The then ruling party, Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI), Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM-P), Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, and Ijazul Haq filed appeals against the order in March 2019.

On Wednesday, Sheikh Rashid appea­red before the apex court and sought withdrawal of his appeal. His counsel Sardar Abdul Raziq argued that the appeal was filed on the advice of a lawyer. Justice Isa remarked that Mr Rashid was a senior politician and was not so naïve as to blindly follow the advice.

The CJP asked why the court was “used for ulterior motives” and termed the action of Sheikh Rashid “very strange”. “He [Rashid] is still not stating the truth and accusing the lawyers instead,” Justice Isa noted.

Addressing Mr Rashid, Justice Isa said that the politician made the country a “laughing stock”, incited people to block roads and commit arson, sowed hatred in society and “have no courage to own your stance”.

Justice Minallah pointed out that Mr Rashid was facing charges based on a report prepared by the ISI. The judge said that instead of withdrawing the appeal, the former interior minister could seek proceedings against those officials who wrongly accused him of abetting the unruly crowd.

Absar Alam, a former chairman of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra), also submitted a reply before the court. He contended before the bench that a commission comprising two former cops, Syed Akhtar Shah and former IGP Tahir Alam Khan, could not summon the former prime minister, former chief justice, former chief of army staff, and former ISI chief.

Justice Isa wondered if Absar Alam was seeking the inclusion of a former judge or an ex-general in the commission. He asked him not to express distrust in the commission even before the commencement of the proceedings.

“You can’t oppose the commission on mere apprehensions. You may say this after two months,” the CJP added.

The attorney general informed the court that as per the TORs, the commission is likely to conclude the proceeding in 60 days. Justice Isa remarked: “The time will tell whether the commission was eyewash or a trendsetter.”

The next hearing in this matter has been set for Jan 22.

Published in Dawn, November 16th, 2023

Opinion

Merging for what?

Merging for what?

The concern is that if the government is thinking of cutting costs through the merger, we might even lose the functionality levels we currently have.

Editorial

Dubai properties
Updated 16 May, 2024

Dubai properties

It is hoped that any investigation that is conducted will be fair and that no wrongdoing will be excused.
In good faith
16 May, 2024

In good faith

THE ‘P’ in PTI might as well stand for perplexing. After a constant yo-yoing around holding talks, the PTI has...
CTDs’ shortcomings
16 May, 2024

CTDs’ shortcomings

WHILE threats from terrorist groups need to be countered on the battlefield through military means, long-term ...
Reserved seats
Updated 15 May, 2024

Reserved seats

The ECP's decisions and actions clearly need to be reviewed in light of the country’s laws.
Secretive state
15 May, 2024

Secretive state

THERE is a fresh push by the state to stamp out all criticism by using the alibi of protecting national interests....
Plague of rape
15 May, 2024

Plague of rape

FLAWED narratives about women — from being weak and vulnerable to provocative and culpable — have led to...