• Justice Kayani seeks briefing from intelligence officials; says PM could be summoned to explain inaction
• Verdict in NCCIA recruitments case reserved
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court on Monday warned that it will initiate contempt proceedings against the interior and defence secretaries in an enforced disappearance case for non-compliance with its verdict and lack of action against officials concerned.
Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, hearing a petition filed by Zainab Zaeem regarding her missing husband, warned that if the court’s earlier order were not implemented, it would issue show-cause notices to the aforementioned federal secretaries.
During the hearing, the judge observed that no explanation had been provided about what action, if any, had been taken against the officers concerned so far. Additional Attorney General (AAG) Rashid Hafeez, officials of the Ministry of Defence and other representatives appeared before the court along with the petitioner’s counsel.
Justice Kayani asked the AAG whether an in-camera briefing on missing persons should be arranged, remarking that a field officer from Military Intelligence or ISI could brief the court. The law officer replied that a representative could appear for a briefing, but field officers usually remain anonymous.
Expressing concern, Justice Kayani noted that the man went missing in 2013 and it was 2026. “I want to understand [the matter] through an in-camera briefing… This court wants to act in accordance with the law,” he said, adding that both a single bench and a division bench had already declared it a case of enforced disappearance.
The judge observed that authorities were not ready to disclose the status of the missing person, who is reportedly disabled. “If he is a terrorist, then proceed against him according to law and hold a trial,” he remarked. He also referred to the government’s payment of Rs5 million to the family, questioning whether it was compensation or an acknowledgement of responsibility.
A defence ministry representative stated that the government had never admitted that the individual was in the custody of any agency, adding that the amount was financial assistance approved by the prime minister after more than five years of disappearance. He argued that an in-camera briefing was beyond the scope of the present proceedings.
Justice Kayani remarked the PM could also be summoned to explain why no action had been taken against field officers.
The hearing was adjourned until March 26.
NCCIA hirings
In another case, Justice Kayani reserved his verdict on a petition filed by hundreds of employees of the National Cyber Crimes Investigation Agency, seeking permanent status.
During the proceedings, the judge criticised the government for repeatedly hiring employees on a contractual basis. “Why are permanent appointments not being made? This is political victimisation. These are citizens too,” he remarked.
Petitioners appeared in court along with their counsel Afnan Karim Kundi, while Assistant Attorney General Usman Ghuman represented the federal government. The petitioners’ lawyer submitted that all recruitment requirements, including tests and interviews, had been fulfilled when the employees were hired in 2018, and their contracts were extended from time to time, the last extension being on August 31, 2023.
He said that in January 2023, permission was sought for permanent recruitment on 402 posts, and employees in Grade 15 and below had approached the court. Despite court directions to frame rules and hold meetings, permanent status had not been granted.
Justice Kayani questioned the practice of appointing highly qualified individuals as sub-inspectors and then terminating them after seven or eight years of service. “In today’s era, there is no greater injustice than rendering someone unemployed,” he observed.
The AAG contended that the appointments in question were made after earlier court rulings cited by the petitioners and sought one month to submit a written response. The judge remarked that the government was repeatedly seeking time and burdening the courts instead of framing the rules.
Published in Dawn, February 24th, 2026
