PESHAWAR: Peshawar High Court on Wednesday sought detailed report from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government about its cabinet decision to withdraw security from former chief minister and chief of Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf-Parliamentarians (PTI-P) Mahmood Khan.

A bench comprising Justice Syed Mohammad Attique Shah and Justice Sahibzada Asadullah directed the government to inform the court about the grounds on the basis of which the decision was taken.

The bench was hearing a petition filed by Mahmood Khan, challenging withdrawal of security guards from him by the government last year. The petitioner has requested court to declare as illegal withdrawal of security from him.

Senior lawyer Shumail Ahmad Butt appeared for the petitioner and said that his client had served the province as its chief minister and was now heading his political party.

Mahmood Khan petitions court to declare govt’s decision illegal

He stated that the present chief minister, Ali Amin Gandapur, after assuming his office ordered withdrawal of security from all the former chief ministers.

He added that the chief minister stated that former chief ministers should hire private security guards for themselves and security would not be provided to them at government expenses.

He stated that the petition was filed for restoring security for the petitioner.

When the bench inquired what the stance of KP chief secretary was in that regard, the counsel said that the chief secretary had stated that the order was not issued by him rather the decision was taken in a cabinet meeting chaired by the chief minister.

He stated that security was available for the chief secretary, other officers and VIPs, but the same was withdrawn from the petitioner. The bench inquired as to how the court could interfere in affairs of the executive.

Mr Butt said when an executive order was in conflict with the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan then court could interfere in it.

He stated when the government withdrew security from caretaker chief minister, it also withdrew it from a former elected chief minister.

The bench in a lighter vein remarked that apparently the real target of the government decision was the petitioner, but the caretaker chief minister also fell prey to it.

Mr Butt contended that a policy was formulated in 2018 about security protocols and that policy was still in the field.

The bench inquired from an additional advocate general to explain the position as security was withdrawn from a former chief minister but was available to other VIPs. He stated that it was the domain of the provincial cabinet and it had to decide who was entitled to how much security, if any.

He said that security was provided to those persons, who could afford the expenses of security guards. He added that economic condition was also one of the reasons of withdrawing security from certain categories of persons.

Mr Butt pointed out that another former chief minister Akram Khan Durrani was provided with the required protocol. He stated that in past a chief minister was entitled to two security personnel, which was later on increased to eight personnel.

He contended that provision of security to former chief executives of the province was necessary as those were political people having more threats to them.

Published in Dawn, January 23rd, 2025