Constitutional Rights and Responsibilities of the PTI March.

[Kompromat]

This is being posted to get two things straight.

1: If or not PTI's march legal and constitutional?
2: To establish the rights and responsibilities of such a march as per the constitution.

• First of all, as per the constitution all Pakistani citizens regardless of race, religion, creed etc have an inalienable right to 'peacefully associate, assemble, move and express' with freedom. If the the govt carries on its hindrance campaign on trying to shut down the freeways, railways and to deny fuel to the Pakistani citizens, consequently denying access to the venue or trying to detain the opposition activists to deny them their free speech rights, it most certainly would be a blatant breach of the constitution which would render the actions of the govt illegal and unconstitutional.
  
  It also protects under the article 218/3, a free, fair and a just election to take place without any corrupt practices. This clearly wasn't the case in the last election, therefore the march in my view has constitutional basis.
  
  
• Secondly, those who will attend the march as well as the leadership of PTI have the 'right' to do so, however they also bear a 'constitutional responsibility' to remain utterly peaceful, calm and do not indulge in any illegal activity which bodes ill for national peace. They must present their demands in a peaceful, civil and constitutional manner in order to keep their constitutional rights.
  
  Thank you | Aeronaut

 

[Col.Aureliano]

What does the Constitution say about Government's responsibility to hinder any activity which although peaceful by intention has the potential to deteriorate into threat to peace?

 

[Leader]

What does the Constitution say about Government's responsibility to hinder any activity which although peaceful by intention has the potential to deteriorate into threat to peace?

by imposing article 144, emergency 245, governor raj, curfew, but if you think that violence by state in any manner is justified, you need to know its called state oppression & its wrong,unless protesters go violent first, still there are limitations to what govt can restore to. in any case power to open fire lies with the chief minister or prime minister only.. only he can give orders to shot to police or army. like in model town killing the order can only be given by the chief minister.

 

[Kompromat]

What does the Constitution say about Government's responsibility to hinder any activity which although peaceful by intention has the potential to deteriorate into threat to peace?

That depends on the conduct of the protesters and the conduct of the govt in handling such a situation. If any party breaches the constitution, both of them shall bear the responsibility.

 

[Col.Aureliano]

by imposing article 144, emergency 245, governor raj, curfew, but if you think that violence by state in any manner is justified, you need to know its called state oppression & its wrong,unless protesters go violent first, still there are limitations to what govt can restore to. in any case power to open fire lies with the chief minister or prime minister only.. only he can give orders to shot to police or army. like in model town killing the order can only be given by the chief minister.

Mine, was ,of course, a rhetorical question. Thank you for rightly elaborating though.

That depends on the conduct of the protesters and the conduct of the govt in handling such a situation. If any party breaches the constitution, both of them shall bear the responsibility.

The recent statements issued by the leaders of the march sound threatening and have made their commitment to peace, if any, very doubtful.

 

[Kompromat]

Mine, was ,of course, a rhetorical question. Thank you for rightly elaborating though.


The recent statements issued by the leaders of the march sound threatening and have made their commitment to peace, if any, very doubtful.

May i please have a look?

 

[Fahad Khan 2]

ہاہاہاہا

فوج بھی بلوا لو

پولیس بھی بلوا لو

عدالتیں بھی لگوا لو

جج بھی بلوا لو

امریکنوں کو بلوا لو

عربوں کو بلوا لو

مارچ بھی ہو گا

انصاف ملتا نہیں, چھینا جاتا ہے​

 

[Danish saleem]

This is being posted to get two things straight.

1: If or not PTI's march legal and constitutional?
2: To establish the rights and responsibilities of such a march as per the constitution.

• First of all, as per the constitution all Pakistani citizens regardless of race, religion, creed etc have an inalienable right to 'peacefully associate, assemble, move and express' with freedom. If the the govt carries on its hindrance campaign on trying to shut down the freeways, railways and to deny fuel to the Pakistani citizens, consequently denying access to the venue or trying to detain the opposition activists to deny them their free speech rights, it most certainly would be a blatant breach of the constitution which would render the actions of the govt illegal and unconstitutional.
  
  It also protects under the article 218/3, a free, fair and a just election to take place without any corrupt practices. This clearly wasn't the case in the last election, therefore the march in my view has constitutional basis.
  
  
• Secondly, those who will attend the march as well as the leadership of PTI have the 'right' to do so, however they also bear a 'constitutional responsibility' to remain utterly peaceful, calm and do not indulge in any illegal activity which bodes ill for national peace. They must present their demands in a peaceful, civil and constitutional manner in order to keep their constitutional rights.
  
  Thank you | Aeronaut

Brother, as a student of law i wanted to ask few Questions!


1. In constitution, is that possible that Government of Pakistan able to announce recounting or re balloting?
2. In constitution, is that possible that after the lapse of 120 days of Election Notification of winning candidate, is that possible to de-notify that candidate?
3. In constitution, is that possible that if Federal Governments resigns, then the what procedures required to form the care takers.

Danish

 

[Col.Aureliano]

May i please have a look?

Real issue is.. its not the participants of the march that pose danger. Of course not. But let us look at the bigger picture with FATA Operation in background; can't there be a terrorist backlash?? The march is likely to outnumber total population of Islamabad..

 

[Spring Onion]

Real issue is.. its not the participants of the march that pose danger. Of course not. But let us look at the bigger picture with FATA Operation in background; can't there be a terrorist backlash?? The march is likely to outnumber total population of Islamabad..

Mine, was ,of course, a rhetorical question. Thank you for rightly elaborating though.

yes there could be that threat but then when Qadri was there was a bigger threat above all due to ongoing operation the terrorists fled to Afghanistan and halted their activities so chances are less.

The recent statements issued by the leaders of the march sound threatening and have made their commitment to peace, if any, very doubtful.

I find threats hurled by PML N of leveling treason charges against Qadri will create more violence

 

[Col.Aureliano]

Brother, as a student of law i wanted to ask few Questions!


1. In constitution, is that possible that Government of Pakistan able to announce recounting or re balloting?
2. In constitution, is that possible that after the lapse of 120 days of Election Notification of winning candidate, is that possible to de-notify that candidate?
3. In constitution, is that possible that if Federal Governments resigns, then the what procedures required to form the care takers.

Danish

A student of law' should be answering these questions.

 

[Danish saleem]

Real issue is.. its not the participants of the march that pose danger. Of course not. But let us look at the bigger picture with FATA Operation in background; can't there be a terrorist backlash?? The march is likely to outnumber total population of Islamabad..

Brother,

i thought IK is a leader but i was wrong because of these three points.

1. He always ask to talk Taliban, but he not want to talk with Government.!
2. When Government hit back Taliban, he starts protesting !
3. He only targeting PML N, which is the telling , a Hidden Agenda.

Danish

 

[Col.Aureliano]

yes there could be that threat but then when Qadri was there was a bigger threat above all due to ongoing operation the terrorists fled to Afghanistan and halted their activities so chances are less.




I find threats hurled by PML N of leveling treason charges against Qadri will create more violence

yes there could be that threat but then when Qadri was there was a bigger threat above all due to ongoing operation the terrorists fled to Afghanistan and halted their activities so chances are less.




I find threats hurled by PML N of leveling treason charges against Qadri will create more violence

Its not about more violent or less violent !! Anything less violent than a nuclear war should be palatable??!! And I believe its still too premature to celebrate "all terrorist have fled to Afghanistan' .

 

[Spring Onion]

Its not about more violent or less violent !! Anything less violent than a nuclear war should be palatable??!! And I believe its still too premature to celebrate "all terrorist have fled to Afghanistan' .

1. its stupidity of PML N to hurl threats against political leaders which is going to add up to more agitation.

2. Violence is not acceptable be it by anyone.

3. Who is celebrating ? in my opinion this fleeing of terrorists is more dangerous for Pakistan. i am just saying the clam and silence we are experiencing currently from terrorists is mainly due to ongoing operation once it is relaxed they will strike back

 

[Col.Aureliano]

May i please have a look?

Of course you can!