The Supreme Court will today resume hearing a set of review petitions against its verdict on the 2017 sit-in by Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) at Faizabad, in Islamabad.
Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Qazi Faez Isa, a three-judge bench, which includes Justice Aminud Din Khan and Justice Athar Minallah, will take up the pleas shortly.
Authored by Justice Isa years before he took oath as the chief justice, the searing judgement had instructed the defence ministry and the tri-services chiefs to penalise personnel under their command who were found to have violated their oath.
It had also directed the federal government to monitor those advocating hate, extremism and terrorism and prosecute them in accordance with the law.
Adverse observations were also made against several government departments for causing inconvenience to the public as the 20-day sit-in paralysed life in both Islamabad and Rawalpindi.
Pleas were subsequently moved against the verdict by the Ministry of Defence, the Intelligence Bureau, the PTI, Pemra, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), AML chief Sheikh Rashid and Ijazul Haq.
However, most of the petitioners withdrew their pleas, prompting the CJP to ask “why is everyone so afraid to speak the truth”.
During the previous hearing, former Pemra chief Absar Alam had made revelations on the interference of intelligence agencies and “media coercion” during the Faizabad sit-in.
In an order issued on the petitions earlier this week, the SC had stated that it expects the government to finalise the fact-finding probe on the sit-in within the specified time frame. It had also granted ECP a month to prepare and submit a report on the TLP and its funding.
Furthermore, the court order had reproduced the contention of the attorney general (AG), who stated that the federal government had filed a civil review petition on behalf of the ministry of defence and another on behalf of the Intelligence Bureau, both of which the federal government wants to withdraw.
The review petitions were filed and have been kept pending for over four years and eight months. One does not expect the federal government to file frivolous applications and abuse the process of the court, the court had observed.
Ahead of the hearing today, Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan said the government would submit a fresh notification on the fact-finding panel in court.
The petitions
The IB’s review petition had urged the court to set aside the adverse observations made against the department, adding that it was a premier civilian intelligence agency which was responsible for state security.
It had contended that the impugned order created a “bad impression” on the public that the IB was involved in unlawful activities and politics, after transgressing constitutional boundaries.
It had said the observations made in the verdict were based on “vague facts” and that during the sit-in, the department was in close contact with the federal and Punjab governments and forewarned them about the plans and intentions of the TLP, with a view to foiling their attempt to storm/lockdown Islamabad.
Meanwhile, In response, the defence ministry had requested the court to set aside the explicit or implicit observations about the armed forces and/or the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
The ministry’s petition had said that a host of factors may affect morale. However, it said, what was fatal was the belief amongst the rank and file that their officers while acting like “self-proclaimed saviours” were violating the fundamental rights of citizens and instead of serving “Pakistan and thus all its citizens”, supporting a “particular political party, faction or politician”.
“…When the source of such remarks is the highest court in the land, it can promote fissiparous tendencies and has the capacity to destroy the ability of the armed forces to act as a cohesive fighting force,” the review petition had argued.
It had further said there was no evidence before the court to suggest that the armed forces or ISI were, in any manner, involved with either the sit-in or a particular outcome of the general elections of 2018 or the abridgement of free speech or intimidation or censorship of the press.
In its petition, the ECP had contended that it had comprehensively applied and enforced the Constitution, law and code of conduct by issuing a letter to the TLP on Aug 16, 2017, asking the party to provide details of its bank account and even had issued notices to it with a warning to cancel its registration.
Meanwhile, the PTI had questioned the mention in the verdict of the 2014 joint sit-in organised by it and the Pakistan Awami Tehreek in Islamabad, and had said the impression one gets from it was that the party conducted an illegal protest for publicity and deliberately made wrong allegations.
The petition contended that the party had nothing to do with the TLP Faizabad sit-in and therefore the remarks should be expunged.
Rashid had approached the court to remove his name from the judgement. In his petition, the AML chief pleaded that if the words concerning him in para-4 of the judgement were not expunged, he would suffer adversely in his life.
Faizabad sit-in
Daily life in Islamabad was disrupted for 20 days (from Oct 2 to Nov 27, 2017) when protesters belonging to religiopolitical parties occupied the Faizabad Interchange which connects Rawalpindi and Islamabad through the Islamabad Expressway and Murree Road, both of which are the busiest roads in the twin cities.
The agitators claimed that during the passage of the Elections Act 2017, the Khatm-i-Nabuwwat oath was deliberately modified as part of a larger conspiracy. The amendment to the oath was deemed a “clerical error” by the government and was subsequently rectified through an act of Parliament.
The government had attempted to negotiate in vain with the protesters to end the sit-in several times. Finally, it launched an operation to disperse the protesters, in which at least six people were killed and scores others injured. After the botched operation, the government decided to call in the army for help.
Negotiations were undertaken with protesters once again, and the government accepted a number of their demands in return for ending the protest. The agreement document bears the signatures of then interior minister Ahsan Iqbal, TLP chief Khadim Hussain Rizvi, and Gen Faiz Hameed among others.
