SC refuses to intervene as PTI long march nears Islamabad
• Says matter needs to be resolved politically, court cannot afford to intervene and create ‘awkward’ situation for itself
• On motorway blockades, IHC CJ says no one can be allowed to disrupt routine life
ISLAMABAD: While hearing separate petitions pertaining to the inconvenience the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) long march will likely cause to the public upon its arrival in Islamabad, the Supreme Court said on Thursday that it would not intervene until the situation “got out of hand”, whereas the Islamabad High Court (IHC) said protesters could not affect the freedom of movement of citizens by blocking roads.
During the hearing of a petition filed by Senator Kamran Murtaza of the Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F), the Supreme Court bench said it could not entertain the “infructuous” petition since it could not regulate the long march at this point.
The petitioner had sought court directives to control the long march, along with an assurance from the PTI leadership to ensure that such gatherings will not encroach on the fundamental rights of the people of Islamabad.
As it dismissed the plea, the top court said the political issues should be sorted out of the courts. It, however, allowed the petitioner to approach the court again if the situation went out of hand during the long march.
During the hearing, CJP Umar Ata Bandial asked the petitioner: “Are you afraid that the Azadi march may repeat the incidents of May 25, when protestors had breached the court directions by entering the Red Zone on their way towards D-Chowk.”
Senator Murtaza responded that the march would reach Islamabad by Friday or Saturday as per PTI leader Fawad Chaudhry’s statement and expressed apprehensions that the march would affect the routine life in the federal capital.
“Staging a march is the right of PTI but it should not stifle the rights of ordinary citizens,” argued the senator.
Justice Athar Minallah, who was recently elevated to the top court, asked the petitioner to approach the executive over the matter. He further asked if the senator considered the administration “weak and helpless” to control the participants of the long march. “Should the court perform the role of the deputy commissioner,” wondered Justice Minallah.
‘Extraordinary situations’
The court can only intervene in case of extraordinary situations, Justice Minallah reminded the petitioner, asking why was there a need for the court’s intervention when the administration enjoyed a wide range of powers to tackle any kind of situation.
Senator Murtaza, however, pleaded that the situation had gone too far since a person had been killed during the Wazirabad firing incident and added that he had come to the court in his personal capacity, not as a senator.
Justice Ayesha Malik asked Mr Murtaza, “Did you ever approach the administration since the march has been going on for the past many days?”
The CJP, on the other hand, regretted that interventions in political matters like these “create an awkward situation for the judiciary”. He said this was a political matter and therefore should be resolved politically.
Meanwhile, Additional Attorney General (AAG) Chaudhry Aamir Rehman told the court that PTI leadership was told to contain their march in Rawat, but the party had not provided an affidavit in this regard as of yet. The AAG sought time to consult the administration on the latest development and after a short break, informed the court that the administration had received a letter from PTI but the party has not responded about the date and place for holding the protest.
‘No sit-in on roads’
Meanwhile, IHC Chief Justice Amir Farooq stated that closing down highways and motorways in protest affected routine life and business activities and no one could be allowed to stage sit-ins on these roads.
The CJ also recalled how former IHC judge Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui held that all protest rallies and gatherings should be held at the Parade Ground, adding foreigners also lived in the capital city and restrictions on the movement always affects the diplomatic movement.
“It is the right to hold rallies and protest marchers but the rights of movement of the common citizens should not get affected,” Justice Farooq observed. He added the control of the highways and motorways fell in the domain of the federal government; therefore, it can issue any direction in this regard.
The IHC CJ made these remarks after he clubbed a petition moved by All Traders Welfare Association against the sit-in with an earlier plea moved by PTI seeking a no-objection certificate for the sit-in in the capital.
Advocate General Islamabad Jehangir Jadoon and Additional Attorney General Munawar Iqbal Doogal had requested the court to hear the petition with the PTI’s plea.
Published in Dawn, November 18th, 2022