Pakistan High Courts updates

[ghazi52]

LHC allowed PPP to hold meeting at Liaquat Bagh on 27th: Kaira
Aamir Yasin
December 25, 2019

Pakistan Peoples Party’s (PPP) Punjab president Qamar Zaman Kaira said Shahbaz Sharif should come back to the country and fulfil his responsibility to lead the opposition and Maryam Nawaz should also break her silence. — APP/File
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Peoples Party’s (PPP) Punjab president Qamar Zaman Kaira on Tuesday said that despite the federal government’s effort to create hurdles in the way of a public meeting in Rawalpindi, the party was granted permission by the Lahore High Court (LHC) to continue its preparation to observe the death anniversary of Benazir Bhutto at Liaquat Bagh on Dec 27.

“Apparently, Prime Minister Imran Khan is not willing to get the legislation about the chief of the army staff passed by parliament as he is trying to divide the opposition and the bill will not pass without its support,” he said at a press conference at PPP Media House.

He said Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Shahbaz Sharif should come back to the country and fulfil his responsibility to lead the opposition and Maryam Nawaz should also break her silence.

Says PM is not willing to get the legislation about the army chief passed by parliament

Accompanied by PPPP secretary general Farhatullah Babar, information secretary Dr Nafisa Shah, general secretary Punjab Chaudhry Manzoor Ahmed, spokesman for the PPP chairman Mustafa Nawaz Khokhar and Nazir Dhoki, Mr Kaira said the PPP was observing the death anniversary of Benazir Bhutto at Liaquat Bagh for the first time and workers of the party would ensure their presence at the public meeting from all over the country.

“The party had informed Rawalpindi’s district administration on Dec 1 and the administration informed the PPP just last night that the permission to hold jalsa at Liaquat Bagh on Dec 27 has been refused,” he added.

He said the PPP approached the high court and informed it about the situation and the party was allowed to continue preparations for the jalsa at Liaquat Bagh. “The administration is responsible for providing security. The PPP will give its future strategy in that jalsa,” he said.

Mr Kaira recalled that at the time when Benazir Bhutto had addressed the public meeting in Liaquat Bagh, the country was going through a dire situation and once more the situation demanded leadership. “Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari is the only leader who can provide that leadership to the country,” he said.

He said the date for the public meeting was announced at the PPP’s foundation day function in Muzaffarabad on Nov 30, but efforts were being made to stop its political activities.

Mr Kaira said holding a public gathering was the right of every party and the PPP would exercise that right. He thanked the court for allowing the PPP to hold its public meeting.

“If the Jamaat-i-Islami can hold its jalsa just a couple of days ago in Islamabad, the PPP also has a right to hold its public gathering,” he said.

In reply to a question, the PPP leader said that the country was facing many crises and the government’s allies were also saying that if this government continued for another four months, the country would face further crisis. “The only panacea of all problems is fair and free elections,” he said.

He said Rana Sanaullah had been granted bail, but Ahsan Iqbal was arrested. PPP’s Punjab general secretary Chaudhry Manzoor claimed that the party workers and supporters would show up at the public meeting in highest numbers in history. He said that during Ayub Khan’s tenure, there were many leaders, but Zulfikar Ali Bhutto raised the voice for voiceless segments; in the Musharraf era, Benazir Bhutto raised the voice, and at present time, Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari is one and only who raised his voice for the voiceless.

Published in Dawn, December 25th, 2019

 

[ghazi52]

 

[ghazi52]

 

[ghazi52]

Justice Mamoon to take oath as LHC CJ on Jan 1

December 30, 2019

Justice Mamoon Rashid Sheikh. PHOTO: TWITTER/@pja_lahore

LAHORE: Justice Mamoon Rashid Sheikh will take oath as 48th chief justice of the Lahore High Court on January 1 (Wednesday) at a ceremony to be held in Governor House.

Governor Chaudhry Muhammad Sarwar will administer the oath to Justice Sheikh.

Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Shamim Khan will be reaching superannuation on December 31. Appointed as high court judge on February 19, 2010, Justice Khan served as chief justice for one year.

Chief Justice-designate Justice Sheikh will retire on March 18, 2020.

Another LHC judge, Justice Shahid Mubeen, will also retire on December 31. With the retirements, the number of vacant seats in the high court will become 17 against its maximum sanctioned strength of 60.

 

[ghazi52]

PIA chief executive told by SHC to stop working over eligibility for job

KARACHI: Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) Chief Executive Air Marshal Arshad Malik was told by the Sindh High Court (SHC) on Tuesday to stop working owing to a petition filed over his eligibility for the CEO post.

The general secretary of the PIA's Senior Staff Association (SASA), Safdar Anjum, had filed a petition at the high court challenging Malik's appointment as the airline's CEO. It stated that the incumbent chief did not fulfil the educational requirements nor did he have any relevant experience for the job.

The two-member bench during the proceedings stopped the national carrier's CEO from performing his functions and told the airline to neither transfer, hire or fire any employees nor buy or sell assets. It said the PIA could not sell assets worth more than Rs10 million or make policies for the time being.

The SHC had issued a notice to the deputy general to appear before the court on January 22 in relation to the case.

Prior to joining the PIA, Malik — a graduate of the National Defence University (NDU) and qualified in Air Command and Staff Course from the US — had served as the Vice Chief of the Air staff.

He has served more than 40 years in the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) before being appointed the airline's chief executive officer. He was posted as the PIA's chairperson on October 11, 2018, by the federal government. On April 2, 2019, he was appointed the CEO.

 

[ghazi52]

IHC seeks reply from NAB over fresh amendments to ordinance

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Wednesday sought a reply from the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) about protection to bureaucrats through the fresh amendments to NAB Ordinance and extended the interim bail of former federal minister and JUI-F leader Akram Khan Durrani.

A division bench of IHC conducted the hearing on Akram Durrani’s plea seeking extension in his interim bail. During the hearing, Chief Justice Athar Minallah remarked that Akram Durrani was holding a public office while the principal accounts officer of the ministry was a secretary who was holding all powers. The chief justice asked the NAB that whether it had also arrested the principal accounts officer. He asked how a public office-holder is arrested under the same law.

The NAB prosecutor said the secretary was also an accused in this case. The bench remarked that the bureaucrats, who had all the powers, had been protected through the amendment to NAB Ordinance, while inquiry was initiated against the person having no powers, for misuse of authority. The NAB prosecutor told the bench that arrest warrants were issued against Durrani in an illegal appointment inquiry, not in a case pertaining to holding assets beyond known sources of income. He prayed the court togrant some time to submit NAB's fresh reply.

Justice Athar Minallah remarked that the NAB has to convince the court under the new accountability law. The IHC chief justice asked the NAB official that whether the accused Akram Durrani was cooperating with the NAB investigation. The prosecutor said the accused was appearing before the NAB constantly, but he was not cooperating with the investigation team. The court extended the interim bail of Durrani till January 15, and sought fresh reply from the NAB.

..................................


Justice Mamoon Rashid sworn in as new chief justice of LHC

https://nation.com.pk/NewsSource/web-desk
January 01, 2020


Justice Mamoon Rashid Sheikh on Wednesday has taken oath as the 51st Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court (LHC).

According to details, Punjab Governor Chaudhry Muhammad Sarwar administered the oath to Justice Mamoon in a ceremony at Governor House.

Punjab Chief Minister Sardar Usman Buzdar, high court judges, government officials and prominent lawyers were also present in the event.

Justice Mamoon Rashid Sehikh has replaced Justice Sardar Muhammad Shamim Khan for just two months and 18 days.

 

[ghazi52]

No record of cabinet's approval over filing of treason case against Musharraf, LHC told

January 10, 2020

A three-member LHC bench is hearing a set of petitions filed by former president Pervez Musharraf challenging multiple actions against him. — INP/File

The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Friday posed questions regarding the legality of the treason case filed against former dictator Pervez Musharraf and the formation of the special court that conducted the trial and handed death sentence to the retired general after finding him guilty.

A three-member bench, comprising Justice Syed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Justice Mohammad Ameer Bhatti and Justice Chaudhry Masood Jahangir, was hearing a set of petitions filed by Musharraf challenging multiple actions against him, including conviction in high treason, the establishment of the trial court and filing of the complaint by the government.

Barrister Ali Zafar, who has been appointed as the court's amicus curea in the case, said that the case against Musharraf seemed to have been filed on the behest of the then prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, as there is record of the matter being on the agenda of any of the cabinet meetings held at the time.

"A case under Article 6 cannot be filed without the cabinet's approval," Barrister Zafar insisted. The court asked if the matter was on the agenda of any cabinet meeting, to which Zafar responded in the negative.

"None of the cabinet meetings were held on the matter," Barrister Zafar said.

"This was history's most important matter; can the cabinet discuss it without it being an agenda item?" the bench asked.

Justice Bhatti pointed out that during a recent case pertaining to the extension and reappointment of the army chief, the strength of the cabinet was discussed.

"But in Pervez Musharraf's case, the cabinet's approval or its role cannot be seen," the judge said. Justice Bhatti was referring to a recent case pertaining to the tenure of the army chief heard by the Supreme Court, where the bench had inquired how many members of the federal cabinet had approved Prime Minister Imran Khan's decision to extend the tenure of Army Chief Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa.

"On June 21, 2013, the attorney general sent a summary to the prime minister that a case be prepared against Pervez Musharraf under Article 6," Barrister Zafar told the court. "The interior secretary was given the authority to file a complaint on December 29, 2013."

"The case that was prepared was not in accordance with the law, neither was the formation of the special court in accordance with the law," Zafar said and added: "The complaint against Pervez Musharraf was not filed by the lawful authority; the law was violated here as well. According to the law, the cabinet has to nominate the relevant authority which would file the complaint."

Justice Naqvi also inquired how the judges who heard the treason case were appointed.

"On what basis were the judges appointed to the special court?" he asked. "Was there a written communication regarding the appointment of judges to the special court or was everything [decided] over the telephone?"

"The Ministry of Law and Justice wrote a letter to the Supreme Court registrar [asking] for names of judges to form the special court [bench]," the counsel for the federal government told the court.

"When the formation of the court [that heard the case] is wrong and illegal then all its steps and decisions will be considered illegal," Zafar said.

The court also discussed the charges levelled against Musharraf and the manner in which the trial was conducted.

"The federal government constituted the special court but did not decide how the criminal proceedings will be held," Barrister Zafar said. "After the 18th Amendment [in] Article 6, it was imperative to amend the 1973 and 1976 laws pertaining to treason."

Zafar said that though a new offence was added in Article 6, its manner of punishment was not decided.

"The charge sheet which was filed does not mention Article 6 at all," Justice Naqvi noted.

"The special court indicted [Musharraf] on the first day the case was heard," Zafar told the court. "The Supreme Court did not define the relation [of the action] with Article 6 but termed it as an unconstitutional step."

Zafar further said that that the trial was conducted in Musharraf's absence.

"If a person is not joining a trial, the court can, at most, declare him a proclaimed offender," Justice Naqvi said and added: "Which law allows punishing a person without hearing them?"

Referring to the special court's verdict, Justice Naqvi said: "Looking at the verdict, everyone who supported [Musharraf] at the time can be accused of abetting."

Barrister Zafar insisted that "no one can commit an Article 6 offence alone", saying that "it would be unconstitutional if proceedings are carried out against selected people."

"Can the special court summon other suspects if the federal government does not name them [in the case]?" asked Justice Jahangir, to which Barrister Zafar responded in the negative.

The court asked the federal government to submit a summary of the formation of the special court and directed the state's lawyer to present arguments on Monday. The hearing was adjourned until Monday.

A special court of Islamabad had on December 17 handed down death penalty to Musharraf with a two to one majority after six years of hearing the treason case against him. The case was filed by the PML-N government in 2013.

Musharraf, in his petition, had asked the LHC to set aside the special court’s verdict for being illegal, without jurisdiction, unconstitutional, in violation of Articles 10-A, 4, 5, 10 and 10-A of the Constitution. He sought suspension of the verdict till the decision of the petition.

 

[ghazi52]

Special court formed for Musharraf treason trial 'unconstitutional', rules LHC

January 13, 2020

The Lahore High Court on Monday resumed hearing a set of petitions filed by former dictator Pervez Musharraf challenging multiple actions against him, including his conviction in high treason, the establishment of the trial court and filing of the complaint by the government. — AFP/File




The Lahore High Court on Monday declared the formation of a special court — which heard the treason case against former dictator Pervez Musharraf and handed him a death sentence after finding him guilty of treason — as "unconstitutional".

The LHC bench, which was hearing Musharraf's petitions against the verdict, also ruled that the treason case against the former president was not prepared in accordance with the law. A short order of the high court will be released shortly.

A three-member full bench of the LHC, comprising Justice Syed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Justice Mohammad Ameer Bhatti and Justice Chaudhry Masood Jahangir, delivered the unanimous verdict.

Musharraf was sentenced to death by a special court in Islamabad on December 17, 2019, six years after the trial started. The case was filed by the PML-N government against Musharraf for suspending the Constitution on November 3, 2007, when he imposed emergency in the country.

According to both the federal government and Musharraf's lawyer, after the high court's ruling, the verdict issued by the special court stands voids.

In his petitions following the damning verdict, Musharraf had asked the LHC to set aside the special court’s verdict for being illegal, without jurisdiction and unconstitutional for violating Articles 10-A, 4, 5, 10 and 10-A of the Constitution. He also sought suspension of the verdict till a decision on his petition is made.

The former military chief is currently in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. He was admitted to a hospital following deterioration of his health last month.


Arguments in court

As the court resumed hearing Musharraf's pleas on Monday morning, Additional Attorney General (AAG) Ishtiaq A. Khan, appearing on behalf of the federal government, presented the summary and record of the formation of the special court.

On Friday, Justice Naqvi had asked the federal government to submit a summary on the formation of the special court and had directed the state's lawyer to present arguments on Monday (today).

AAG Khan said that the matter of forming a case against Musharraf was never included in the cabinet agenda.

Justice Jahangir asked when the cabinet meeting under discussion was held. AAG Khan responded that it was held on June 24, 2013. He added that the cabinet met again with regards to the appointment of judges for the special court.

"It is the truth that the formation of the special court to hear the case against Musharraf was done without cabinet approval," he said.

According to the additional attorney general, the appointment of one of the judges in the special court had come under discussion in the cabinet on May 8, 2018. He added that on October 21, 2018, Justice Yawar Ali had retired and the special court was again broken.

The court inquired if the matter of the process of filing a complaint in the case had come up in cabinet meetings. AAG Khan responded in the negative.

"According to your record, there is no agenda or notification regarding the formation of the special court or the filing of the complaint," the bench noted.

The bench also discussed if imposing an emergency amounted to the suspension of the Constitution and Justice Naqvi remarked that "emergency is part of the Constitution".

"If the situation is such that the government imposes an emergency, will a treason case be filed against that government as well?" asked Justice Naqvi.

"Can an emergency be imposed under Article 232?" asked Justice Bhatti. The additional attorney general conceded that such a step would be in accordance with the Constitution.

"Then how is it a deviation from the Constitution?" asked Justice Naqvi. The AAG told the court that while passing the 18th Amendment, the parliament had included the suspension of the Constitution in Article 6 as an offence.

The bench asked if a person can be punished for an offence committed before an amendment is passed in that regard.

"An offence committed in the past cannot be punished after new legislation," the federal government's counsel told the court.

Justice Naqvi further said that by adding three words, the parliament had changed the entire status of the Constitution. He was referring to the amendments made in Article 6, where the parliament had deemed the abrogation, subverting or suspension of the Constitution as an offence of high treason.

"How many members comprised the FIA team that conducted the inquiry against Perves Musharraf?" asked Justice Naqvi, as the court examined the proceedings of the trial against Musharraf.

"A 20-25 member team was constituted which completed the inquiry," the AAG told the court.

"How many of those members participated in the trial?" the judge asked.

"Only one of them appeared [before the special court] for the trial," said AAG Khan.

"What is the value of an inquiry against Pervez Musharraf when those who conducted the inquiry did not appear during the trial [proceedings]?" remarked the judge.


Musharraf case was not on cabinet agenda

During the hearing on Friday, the LHC had posed questions regarding the legality of the treason case and the formation of the special court that conducted the trial and had handed Musharraf the death sentence.

Barrister Ali Zafar, who has been appointed the court's amicus curea, said that the case against Musharraf seemed to have been filed on the behest of then prime minister Nawaz Sharif, as there is no record of the matter being on the agenda of any of the cabinet meetings held at the time.

"A case under Article 6 cannot be filed without the cabinet's approval," Barrister Zafar had insisted. The court asked if the matter was on the agenda of any cabinet meeting, to which Zafar had responded in the negative.

"None of the cabinet meetings were held on the matter," Barrister Zafar said.

"This was history's most important matter; can the cabinet discuss it without it being an agenda item?" the bench had asked.

In an earlier hearing on Musharraf's plea, AAG Ishtiaq A Khan on Thursday told the bench that the formation of the special trial court had not been approved by the federal cabinet.

He said the record showed that only one letter was written by then premier Nawaz to the ministry of interior for the initiation of an inquiry against Musharraf on the charge of high treason.

 

[ghazi52]

SHC suspends judicial magistrate for allegedly raping woman in his chambers

File photo

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court on Saturday suspended a judicial magistrate in Sehwan after a woman accused him of raping her in his chambers, Geo News reported.

According to an order of the copy available with The News, the judicial magistrate has been suspended for ‘misconduct’ with immediate effect and directed to report to the High Court.

The allegations surfaced when the civil judge took the case of the woman who had eloped to Sehwan from Shahdadkot with a man. The couple had fled from their family members who were against the two marrying.

On January 13, the couple's relatives arrived at the guest house in Sehwan, but the matter was eventually taken to Sehwan police who took the couple into custody.

Police later presented the woman before the court of the judicial civil judge to record her statement.

Later, in her complaint to the police, the woman alleged that the judicial magistrate sexually assaulted her after directing the lady police officers accompanying her to leave his chambers.

Following the allegations, police took the victim to the Syed Abdullah Shah Institute of Medical Sciences in Sehwan for a medical check-up, which confirmed the woman was raped.

According to a senior police official, who spoke to Geo News on the condition of anonymity, an inquiry has already been conducted by a district and sessions judge who confirmed that the allegations of the civil judge sexually assaulting the woman in his chambers.

The sessions judge, in his findings, had recommended disciplinary action against the civil judge.

It is pertinent to mention here that police is yet to register a First Information Report against the civil judge and he is, at the moment, only suspended from performing his duties as a judicial magistrate.

The judge will continue to draw his salary during the period of his suspension, the SHC said.

 

[ghazi52]

Sindh IGP to stay in office till centre decides to remove him: SHC

The Sindh Court High Court (SHC) on Monday said that the province's Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kaleem Imam, would continue working until the Establishment Division decides to remove him from the office.

The remarks were made by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar who was overseeing the proceedings of a case related to the Sindh government's request for the removal of the IGP.

Sindh Advocate General Shabbir Shah appeared on behalf of the provincial government in court today.

The petition challenging the decision of the provincial cabinet to change the Sindh IGP was filed in court earlier today by lawyer and activist Jibran Nasir. The petitioner also shared a copy of the document on Twitter.


M. Jibran Nasir

✔@MJibranNasir

We have filed petition today challenging Sindh Govt's illegal notification to change IG Sindh in violation of established laws and principles by Sindh High Court & Supreme Court. While opposition in Sindh Assembly appears hopeless it is upto citizens to fight for good governance.

During the hearing, the counsel for the petitioner argued that in the letter sent to the federal government requesting Imam's removal, there was no mention of any discussions over the matter between the province and the centre.

"The federal government has rejected the request of the provincial authorities to remove Imam. The federal authorities have also said that the province cannot appoint an acting officer to replace Imam until a final decision about his removal has been made," the counsel argued.

Responding to the statement, the Sindh advocate-general said that the Sindh government considers it a matter of public interest.

Upon hearing the arguments of both the petitioner and the government, Justice Mazhar observed that the federal government has yet to respond on the matter, and that the court had previously ruled over the issue.

"The court has already ruled that the IGP can only be changed after consultations between the centre and the province. Under the laws, the tenure of the IGP runs for three years. The new IGP must be appointed in accordance with the law," the judge remarked.

The judge then ordered that the incumbent IGP Imam stay in his office until the centre responds to the request.

Further proceedings in the case were adjourned until January 28.

On Saturday, the federal government had said it was considering a request by the Sindh government to remove IGP Imam from office over "unsatisfactory performance".

Earlier this month, the provincial authorities had written a letter to the Establishment Division asking for the removal of Imam and the appointment of another police officer in his place.

In the letter, the Sindh government had also suggested names for the post. The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), which is in opposition in Sindh, had subsequently said it would challenge the removal of Imam in court.

 

[ghazi52]

LHC grants bail to Fawad Hasan Fawad

A picture of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif's principal secretary Fawad Hasan Fawad.

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Tuesday (LHC) granted bail to former prime minister Nawaz Sharif's principal secretary, Fawad Hasan Fawad, in the assets beyond means case, reported Geo News.

Hasan was directed by the court to file security bonds worth Rs10 million after the court approved his bail during a hearing of the assets beyond means case held today.

During proceedings, the bench asked National Accountability Bureau (NAB) prosecutor about how much shares did the ex-principal secretary held in the Motorway City and Kashmir Road plaza projects.

In response, the prosecutor told the court that he was not aware of it and the information should be sought from the suspect. The court responded angrily by asking the NAB lawyer as to why the suspect would share that information, saying that he should have done his homework.

Hasan was arrested by NAB last year in July on allegations of corruption regarding the Ashiana-e-Iqbal Housing Scheme scam and three other projects. He has also served as principal secretary to PM Shahid Khaqan Abbasi in 2017 when he was elected prime minister after Nawaz's disqualification.


Corruption allegations against Fawad Hasan Fawad

According to NAB, the contract for the Ashiana housing scheme was won by a construction company titled Chaudhry Latif and Sons.

However, NAB says then-Punjab chief minister Shehbaz Sharif and his aides awarded the Rs14 billion contract to Lahore Casa Developers — a proxy group of Paragon City (Pvt) Limited, which is said to be owned by Railways Minister Saad Rafique.

Fawad, who was implementation secretary to the chief minister Punjab at the time, levelled charges of wrongdoings against Chaudhry Latif and Sons for the contract to be awarded to Casa Developers.

In a second reference filed in March last year, NAB accused Fawad of amassing Rs1.09 billion worth of illegal assets, including a five kanal commercial plot in Rawalpindi's Saddar area valued at around Rs50 million.

 

[ghazi52]

Peshawar court rejects Manzoor Pashteen's bail request, orders transfer to DI Khan jail


January 28, 2020

A local court in Peshawar on Tuesday ordered that Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement (PTM) chief Manzoor Pashteen be shifted to Dera Ismail Khan, a day after he was arrested and sent to Peshawar Central Jail on a 14-day judicial remand. —

A Peshawar court on Tuesday ordered Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement (PTM) chief Manzoor Pashteen's transfer to a Dera Ismail Khan jail, a day after he was arrested and sent to Peshawar Central Jail on a 14-day judicial remand.

District and sessions judge Muhammad Younis accepted the DI Khan police's request for permission to shift the PTM chief to DI Khan, where a first information report (FIR) has been registered against him.

Pashteen, who was not presented in court during today's proceedings, was represented by his lawyers including Shahab Khattak, Farhat Afridi and Advocate Fazl. Their request of a transit bail for Pashteen was rejected by the court.

After Pashteen is shifted to DI Khan, he is expected to be presented before a judicial magistrate for physical remand.

The PTM chief was arrested on Monday from Peshawar's Shaheen Town.

According to police, a case was registered against the PTM chief at the City Police Station in DI Khan on January 18 under sections 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation), 153-A (promoting enmity between different groups), 120-B (punishment of criminal conspiracy), 124 (sedition), and 123-A (condemning the creation of the country and advocating the abolishment of its sovereignty) of the Pakistan Penal Code.

According to the FIR, a copy of which is available with Dawn.com, Pashteen and other PTM leaders had attended a gathering on January 18 in DI Khan where the PTM chief had allegedly said that the 1973 Constitution violated basic human rights. The FIR added that Pashteen also made derogatory remarks about the state.

Police had also arrested nine other PTM workers who were identified as Muhammad Salam, Abdul Hameed, Idrees, Bilal, Mohib, Sajjadul Hassan, Aimal, Farooq and Muhammad Salman.

Following Pashteen's arrest, PTM leaders and MNAs Mohsin Dawar and Ali Wazir condemned the action, saying that instead of addressing the group's grievances, the state had resorted to arresting its leader.

Dawar said he had contacted the police to ask on what grounds Pashteen had been arrested but added that authorities did not give any reasons and refused to cooperate.

Terming the arrest as an "abduction", Dawar had said: "We think that Manzoor Pashteen has been arrested for the speech he delivered in Bannu in which he said he will gather all Pashtun leaders." He urged PTM workers to stay "peaceful like always" and announced that the group will hold protests across the country as well as abroad on Tuesday.

PTM movement
PTM is a rights-based alliance that, besides calling for the de-mining of the former tribal areas and greater freedom of movement in the latter, has insisted on an end to the practices of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and unlawful detentions, and for their practitioners to be held to account within a truth and reconciliation framework.

The party has been critical of the state's policies in the country's tribal belt, where a massive operation against terrorists was conducted in recent times leading to large-scale displacement and enforced disappearances.

PTM's leaders, in particular its elected members to the National Assembly, have come under fire for pursuing the release of individuals detained by authorities without due process. The army alleges the party of running an anti-national agenda and for playing into the hands of the state's enemies.

Last year, two of PTM's MNAs — Dawar and Wazir — were arrested by police after a protest gathering in Kharqamar for allegedly using violence and clashing with army personnel. The party while rejecting these allegations, insisted that theirs is a peaceful struggle for the rights of people from the country's tribal belt.

 

[ghazi52]

Why pro-PTM protesters were booked for sedition, asks IHC

February 02, 2020

Islamabad High Court (IHC) Chief Justice Athar Minallah on Saturday sought explanation from the capital police and the district administration for invoking offence of sedition against those who were protesting against the arrest of Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) leader Manzoor Pashteen. — AFP/File


ISLAMABAD: Islamabad High Court (IHC) Chief Justice Athar Minallah on Saturday sought explanation from the capital police and the district administration for invoking offence of sedition against those who were protesting against the arrest of Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) leader Manzoor Pashteen.

The court summoned the deputy commissioner and the inspector general of Islamabad police on a petition seeking post-arrest bail of 23 activists of the PTM and Awami Workers Party (AWP).

Justice Minallah heard the bail plea in his chamber. Advocates Babar Sattar, Nisar Shah and Sikandar Naeem represented the detained activists.

The court ordered the DC and the IGP to produce the record related to the arrest of activists.

“Both will appear in person along with the record on Feb 3, 2020 at 10am and explain under what authority of law the offence of sedition has been included in the FIR and why the petitioners who are stated to have exercised their right of assembly in a peaceful manner may not be released on bail.”

The counsel for the petitioners — Ammar Rashid and others — contended before the chief justice that “the case has been registered against the petitioners on the basis of mala fide”.

He also questioned the order issued by the additional district and sessions court dismissing the post-arrest bail petitions of the detained activists, saying it was “arbitrary and not in consonance with the settled principles of law”. He said it was a serious miscarriage of justice and invoking offence of sedition against unarmed peaceful citizens was misuse of authority.

On Jan 30, additional district and sessions judge of Islamabad Mohammad Sohail declined to grant bail to detained activists, saying that prima facie this was a case of terrorism since during protest the protesters had chanted slogans against the government and the army.

It was mentioned in the first information report (FIR) that scores of protesters managed to escape from the spot, but the complainant and the police officials would identify them when they appeared before them.

Interestingly, the police did not invoke any section of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), 1997 in the FIR, but the judge in the concluding paragraph of his decision on the bail plea observed, “I have no hesitation to hold that it is a case in which Section 7 of the Anti Terrorism Act (ATA) is attracted by all force, hence, this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain and decide the bail applications.”

The judge noted in the order sheet that “the allegations were raised and speeches were made against Pakistan and its army as [has been] sufficiently revealed in the subject FIR and as per my perception it definitely amount to threat to coerce and intimidate the government and the same has seemingly created a sense of fear and insecurity among the public”.

Published in Dawn, February 2nd, 2020

 

[ghazi52]

IHC asks CCP chairperson dismissed by govt to resume services

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) revoked a government notification that earlier dismissed the Chairperson of Competition Commission of Pakistan , Vadiyya Khalil.

The IHC revoked another notification issued by the government to dismiss Muhammad Saleem and Dr Shehzad Ansari, two other members of the commission. The high court directed both members to resume their services.

IHC Judge Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb announced the verdict, stating that the government cannot dismiss officials without following the prescribed rules and procedures.

Khalil and other members of the commission who were dismissed had challenged the finance division’s notification which was issued on October 15, 2018.

The division’s decision came after the federal cabinet’s approval on October 4, 2018.

Khalil was appointed as the commission’s chairperson on October 14, 2017, for a term of three years. Ansari, Saleem were appointed on December 4, 2017 for a period of three years.

The then-information minister, Chaudhry had said that it had been decided to remove several high-level officials in banks and government departments as according to a Supreme Court decision, only the cabinet could appoint directors and heads of departments. This role had been unlawfully delegated to Ishaq Dar, the then-finance minister, by the previous PML-N government.

The officials dismissed from their posts include Saeed Ahmed, the president of National Bank of Pakistan; Tahira Raza, the president of First Women Bank; Syed Talat Mehmood, the president of Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited; and Ehsanul Haq Khan, the president of SME Bank.

Besides, four other officials appointed during the PML-N’s tenure were also removed including Jameel Ahmed, the deputy governor of State Bank; Shamsul Hassan, the deputy governor of State Bank; Khalil, Saleem and Ansar of CCP.

 

[ghazi52]

LHC granted bail to Hamza Shehbaz in Ramzan Sugar Mills case

Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader Hamza Shehbaz. Photo: File


The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Thursday accepted the bail plea of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader Hamza Shehbaz in the Ramzan Sugar Mills case, Geo News reported.

A two-member bench of the LHC, headed by Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, on Thursday conducted a hearing into the Ramzan Sugar Mills case. Shehbaz had been indicted in the sugar mills case along with his father, former Punjab Chief Minister Shehbaz Sharif, on April 9 last year.

In February 2019, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) had filed a reference against the two alleging that the former chief minister of Punjab misused his authority by using public funds for the construction of a bridge to facilitate the Ramzan mills, owned by his sons.

On April 17 2019, Hamza was granted pre-arrest bail by LHC, which also restrained NAB from arresting him in cases pertaining to ownership of assets beyond means, until further notice. Hamza was also directed to submit bail bonds worth Rs10 million at the time.

The PML-N leader was then arrested by NAB from inside the LHC on June 11 in the Ramzan Sugar Mills and money laundering cases after the two-member bench rejected Hamza's bail.

The court will hear the bail petition in the money laundering case on February 11.