Peshawar High Court hears petitions against governor’s rule today

Published Updated
0
The Peshawar High Court. — PPI/file
The Peshawar High Court. — PPI/file

PESHAWAR: With Peshawar High Court set to hear today (Tuesday) multiple petitions against imposition of emergency and governor’s rule in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, PTI chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan has sought permission of the court to file an amended petition to challenge the resolutions passed by a joint sitting of the Parliament as well as National Assembly and Senate separately endorsing the said move.

According to the cause list released by the high court, a two-member bench comprising the senior puisne judge, Justice Ijaz Anwar, and Justice Mohammad Faheem Wali will hear seven constitutional petitions, requesting the court to declare as unconstitutional the Oct 11 presidential proclamation under articles 232 and 234 imposing emergency and governor’s rule in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

The main petition is that of Barrister Gohar Ali, whereas leaders of Tehreek-i-Tahafuz Ayeen-i-Pakistan (TTAP) including its chairman Mahmood Khan Achakzai, its vice chairman Raja Nasir Abbas, Balochistan National Party (Mengal) chief Sardar Akhtar Mengal, Sindh United Party president Zainul Abideen and others have filed two petitions.

Barrister Gohar seeks permission to file amended petition to also challenge parliamentary resolutions endorsing govt move

The other petitions are that of National Democratic Movement’s central and provincial presidents Mohsin Dawar and Bushra Gohar, MNA Shandana Gulzar, and lawyers Suleman Khan and Qaiser Ali Shah.

The petitioners will be represented by Barrister Sameer Khosa, Salman Akram Raja, Ali

Zaman, Mohammad Yousaf Orakzai, Bassam Ahmad Siddiqui, Suleman Khan and Qaiser Shah, etc.

The federal government on Oct 11 imposed emergency in KP, and placed the province under governor’s rule, taking note of the ‘provincial government’s deliberate disengagement from the fight against terrorism’.

The move followed weeks of political tensions between the Centre and PTI – as well as negotiations to bridge their differences – after the latter announced a protest march to Islamabad to demand the release of its jailed founder Imran Khan.

Barrister Gohar on Monday filed an application in the high court, seeking permission to add two further prayers in his constitutional petition.

He requested the court to permit him to make consequential amendments to the facts and grounds of the petition and to file an amended petition within such time as the court may fix.

The prayers which Barrister Gohar requested for inclusion in his petition are: “Declare that the impugned resolutions, namely the separate resolutions passed by National Assembly and Senate on 14 Oct, 2026, and the resolutions passed by Majlis-i-Shoora (Parliament) in joint sitting on 15 Oct, 2026, approving the impugned proclamation, and the impugned SRO are unconstitutional,

without lawful authority and of no legal effect insofar as they approve, sustain or give effect to the impugned proclamation, and do not validate the impugned proclamation or any action taken under it.”

He also requested to “suspend the operation of the impugned SRO and restrain the respondents from taking any further step pursuant to the impugned resolutions or the impugned SRO.”

The application was filed by Advocate Shah Faisal Ilyas on behalf of Mr Gohar.

The applicant stated that on Oct 14 the National Assembly and the Senate passed separate resolutions approving the proclamation of emergency “under second proviso of clause (1) of Article 232”.

He stated that on Oct 15 the Parliament in a joint sitting passed two further resolutions, the first approving the proclamation of emergency under clause (7) of Article 232, and the second approving the proclamation under clause (3) of Article 234. He added that a consequential SRO was also issued by the government announcing the passage of the said resolutions.

“The proclamation of emergency has purportedly been approved by each of the impugned resolutions. Since these are subsequent developments and seek to clothe the inherently unlawful and unconstitutional impugned proclamation with legality, the petitioner is aggrieved of the same,” he said.

Published in Dawn, October 20th, 2026

Opinion

Emergency matters

Emergency matters

If this new technocratic setup proves to be successful and efficient, it might just end up increasing centralisation of decision-making.

Editorial

Burnt bridges
Updated 20 Oct, 2026

Burnt bridges

If PPP wants the decision reversed, it should convince its ally in Islamabad, not ask the opposition to be ‘positive’.
Toll on trade
20 Oct, 2026

Toll on trade

A YEAR after Islamabad severed commercial ties with Kabul over security concerns, the border trade disruption is...
French protests
20 Oct, 2026

French protests

SEVERAL European states have witnessed mass protests over the past few days, mostly focusing on socioeconomic...
Eating grass for AI
Updated 19 Oct, 2026

Eating grass for AI

As dependence on AI grows, the bill could reach hundreds of millions of dollars by the end of the decade.
Climate exodus
Updated 19 Oct, 2026

Climate exodus

Climate displacement could then become another source of instability unless governments prepare for it together.
Settler terrorism
19 Oct, 2026

Settler terrorism

ISRAEL’S genocidal violence in occupied Gaza has understandably captured the world’s attention. Yet another...