Legal Disputes Arise Over PTI's Planned Protest in Islamabad

ISLAMABAD: A legal battle is brewing over the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI)'s scheduled protest in the capital on September 27, as Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Advocate General Shah Faisal Utmankhel raised questions regarding the petition's validity during a hearing at the Islamabad High Court (IHC).

The PTI aims to mobilize support for the release of its founder, Imran Khan, and advocate for constitutional supremacy through this nationwide protest. However, local resident Waqas Ahmed has filed a lawsuit arguing that the demonstration could severely disrupt daily life, traffic, and business operations in Islamabad.

Legal Arguments Presented

During the court proceedings, Advocate General Utmankhel contended that the petitioner should have sought remedies through the Islamabad chief commissioner instead of approaching the high court. He emphasized that the extraordinary jurisdiction of the court, as provided under Article 199 of the Constitution, was not applicable in this case.

Utmankhel also pointed out a significant procedural flaw: the PTI was not named as a respondent in the petition, raising questions about the petition's legitimacy in addressing the planned protest. Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, who presided over the larger bench alongside Justices Muhammad Azam Khan and Muhammad Asif, inquired about the PTI's intentions regarding the protest, leading to discussions about the political implications of such actions.

Political Statements and Responsibilities

As the court deliberated, Chief Justice Dogar referred to statements made by the KP Chief Minister, Sohail Afridi, regarding the long march, prompting Utmankhel to clarify that such political remarks were not within the purview of the advocate general's office. He asserted that the chief minister's loyalty to the state remained intact, despite the political nature of his statements.

Utmankhel defended the right to peaceful protest, arguing that Islamabad is a venue open to all provinces, and citizens should not be barred from expressing their views. He emphasized the importance of the planned sit-in for promoting the rule of law and the judiciary's strength, while Chief Justice Dogar suggested that the protest could occur in the provinces instead.

As various advocates general from other provinces voiced their concerns, highlighting potential disruptions from mass protests, the court ultimately adjourned the hearing until September 14, 2023.

Source: www.dawn.com