Here is the text from that order, thank you for the link. This seems like a pretty confused Order from the respected court, no offence intended. There is no indication of what standards of legality or constitutionality have been applied to the March.
====================
W.P.No.21009/2014
Muhammad Kamran Federation of Pakistan & others
13.08.2014 Mr.Asad Manzoor Butt, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. A. K. Dogar, Advocate for petitioner in W.P. No.20880/2014.
M/s Salman Aslam Butt, Attorney General for Pakistan; Ch. Naseer Ahmad Bhutta, Additional Attorney General for Pakistan; Waqas Qadeer Dar, DAG; Ch. Aamir Rehman, DAG; Amjad Hussain Malik, DAG along with Irshad Ahmad, Section Officer, Home Department.
M/s Muhammad Hanif Khatana, Advocate General, Punjab; Malik Abdul Aziz Awan, Assistant Advocate General Punjab; Ch. Muhammad Iqbal, Additional Advocate General Punjab.
Mr.Ahmad Awais, Advocate for respondent No.2/ Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf P.T.I. along with Mr.Waheed Ahmad, Advocate; Syed Shodab Hussain Jafri, Advocate; Umair Khan Niazi, Advocate; Anis Hashmi, Advocate.
Syed M. J. I. Jafree, Advocate.
Mr.Shoaib Rashid, Advocate.
Irshad Ahmad, Section Officer Home Department on
behalf of respondent No.2.
Mr. Akhtar Shah, Advocate on behalf of respondent
No.5 Pakistan Awami Tehreek P.A.T..
The petitioner being the chairman of an organization
namely “Move on Pakistan” claims to be working for the
sovereignty, authenticity, and the ideology of Pakistan. He, as he has
averred, endorses and defends the Constitution of Islamic Republic
of Pakistan. The petitioner asserts that the respondent No.4 is a
political party operating under the name and style of “Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf” (hereinafter referred to as P.T.I) and sharing the Parliament and Provincial Assemblies as well. The respondent No.5 is also a political party doing political activities under the name and style of “Pakistan Awami Tehreek” (hereinafter referred to as P.A.T), the P.A.T. has not contested the general election nor is part of the Parliament. Both the parties have decided to launch „Long March., „Azadi March. or „Inqlab March. towards Islamabad on 14th
August, 2014 (the Independence Day of Pakistan) with the following motives:
(a) The Prime Minister of Pakistan should step down;
(b) The Parliament of Pakistan be dissolved;
(c) Election Commission be re-constituted; and
(d) Interim government of technocrats be formed and
election be held.
And in case the above said demands are not accepted, they will continue with their Dharna (sit-in) in Islamabad D-Chowk and they will choke the entire system unless their demands are accepted.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the Chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf P.T.I. Mr. Imran Khan has warned of shutting down the entire country if any attempt was made to put him under house arrest. Learned counsel quotes, what Chairman of P.T.I. exactly stated “If the government tried to put me under house arrest, I promise you, we will shut down the whole country”. The respondents No.4 and 5 are inciting the police and administration of the Province as well as the Federal Government by announcing “the Punjab police and administration have to decide whether they are slaves of the Sharifs or government servants. If any of my workers is
tortured or harassed, the Punjab police will not get a place to hide”. Both the parties. heads are openly inviting public at large for
so called revolution after toppling the Federal Government and Provincial Governments excepting Government of the Province of KP by announcing that revolution does not usher in without making sacrifices. Both of them have further instigated the public at large on different occasions that in case any damage is done to them, they should exterminate Sharif brothers and their families. Learned counsel submits that due to illegal threats and designs of the respondents No.4 and 5, the Country has suffered a huge financial loss, its economy is going to a dead end day by day and the Stock Exchange has suffered loss of billions of rupees in three days. He submits that fall of one point in the Stock Exchange means loss of Rs.250 million. In these circumstances, the petitioner has prayed as under:
“the writ petition may please be accepted and order be passed restraining the political parties from protests and long marches and the millions of rupees which will spend on these protests and long marches should be used to help the IDPs of Waziristan.
The government be directed to take steps for the betterment of law and order situation in the country and further direct all the political parties to be united for the well-fare and prosperity of country.”
3. Notices were issued to respondents. Respondent No.4 is represented by Mr. Ahmad Awais, Advocate and respondent No.5 is represented by Mr. Akhtar Shah, Advocate.
Learned counsel for respondent No.4 states that to launch Long March and Dharna is their democratic right guaranteed by the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (hereinafter
referred to as the Constitution” and as such the writ petition is not
maintainable; no clog can be put against the fundamental rights of
the political parties as well as the individuals of the country.
Learned counsel when asked, as to what precise demand of the P.T.I.
was, he recorded his statement as under:
“Since the legitimate demand of the candidates of P.T.I. who lost in general election regarding comparison of thumb impression was not acceded to, therefore, demand of P.T.I. now is that fresh general election be announced in the Country as the present Government is not having legitimate mandate of the people of Pakistan and as such the present Government has no authority to run affairs of the Country. The demand of respondent No.2 is that a fresh election be immediately announced through reconstituted Election Commission of Pakistan.”
4. Learned Attorney General for Pakistan appeared and he was
asked to obtain instructions from the Federal Government as to the
statement of learned counsel for P.T.I., in answer to which he has
submitted his written statement as under:
“THE PRESENT GOVERNMENT IS A DULY ELECTED GOVERNMENT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION WITH A MANDATE OF 190 SEATS OUT OF 342 SEATS. THE PRIME MINISTER WAS ELECTED BY 244 VOTES OUT OF TOTAL POLL OF 294 CAST VOTES AND ENJOYS CONFIDENCE OF THE HOUSE. THEREFORE THE QUESTION OF RESIGNATION DOES NOT ARISE. THE PRIME MINISTER INVITES MR.IMRAN KHAN AND HIS LEADERSHIP WITH OPEN MIND AND HEART ANY TIME TODAY OR TOMORROW FOR A DIALOGUE. IF THEY ARE NOT WILLING TO
COME, THEN WE ARE WILLING TO SEE THEM AT A PLACE AND TIME OF THEIR CHOICE SUBJECT TO THEIR CALLING OFF THE MARCH.”
5.
Mr. A.K.Dogar, Advocate/learned counsel for Lawyers Foundation for Justice (Regd.) appeared in W.P.No.20880/2014, filed almost on the same grounds and submits that the present Federal Government is the creation of General Election held on 11th of May 2013 and under the Constitution, election once held cannot be called in question except through election petitions. He has relied on Indrajit Barua and others etc. v. Election Commission of India and others (AIR 1986 SC 103), Election Commission of Pakistan through its Secretary v. Javaid Hashmi and others (PLD 1989 SC 396) and submitted that Article 225 of the Constitution provides that no election shall be called in question except by an election petition. Learned counsel submits that the respondent No.4 is also a part of Parliament and Provincial Assembly and as such they are bound to remain loyal and faithful to the State being the member of National Assembly. Reliance is made to WATAN Party and another v. Federation of Pakistan and others (PLD 2011 SC 997 (1022). Learned counsel also referred to oath of Member National Assembly.
6.
The arguments of learned counsel Mr.A.K.Dogar, Advocate is that Article 16 of the Constitution is subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order. He has relied on Qari Abdul Hameed Qadri v. District Magistrate, Lahore and another (PLD 1957 (W.P.) Lahore 213) and U.S. V. Cruikshank (1876) 92 US 542). Learned counsel submits that State is duty bound to protect the life and property of its citizens and if the political party
refused to talk and resort to street agitation, it will be deemed to operating in a manner prejudicial to the integrity of the Pakistan. Learned counsel submits that Dr.Allama Tahir ul Qadri, the Chairman of P.A.T. and his party is a group of insurgents and legal action is required to be taken against them according to law.
7.
Learned Attorney General for Pakistan refers the interview dated 4th July 2014 of the Chairman P.T.I. on the electronic as well as the print media offering that in case the Federal Government orders for inspection and auditing of four constituencies of National Assembly under the Chairmanship of Hon.ble Chief Justice Nasirul-Mulk of Supreme Court of Pakistan and the Commission so appointed if completes its process within two weeks, he will call off the Long March or Dharna. Learned Attorney General for Pakistan refers the address of the Prime Minister of Pakistan to the nation on 12.08.2014 and submits that the Prime Minister has already requested the Hon.ble Chief Justice of Supreme Court of Pakistan to constitute a Commission consisting of three Hon.ble Judges of the Hon.ble Supreme Court of Pakistan for ascertaining as under:
“Whether the allegations leveled by Chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf, that the General Elections of 2013 were manipulated or influenced by anyone for the benefit of a political party or individuals, have any basis in fact or law, and if so, to fix
responsibility thereof.”
8. Learned Attorney General for Pakistan submits that the demands of respondent No.4 although are not legitimate but for the sake of country Federal Government has accepted the same; hence the respondent No.4 is bound to call off the Long March or Dharna. Learned Attorney General for Pakistan further submits that the respondent No.5 is alien to the Parliament and is trying to launch a protest full of violence. Due to violence of respondent No.5.s party men, seven police officials have already been killed. Learned Attorney General for Pakistan refers Miss Benazir Bhutto v. Federation of Pakistan and another (PLD 1988 SC 416), Bharat Kumar K. Palicha and another v. State of Kerala and others (AIR 1997 Kirala 291) and Communist Party of India (M) v. Bharat Kumar and others (AIR 1998 SC 184). Regarding maintainability of the petition as challenged by the learned counsel for respondents No.4 and 5, learned Attorney General for Pakistan has relied on
Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and 2 others v. Government of Pakistan and others (PLD 2009 SC 507), Natasha Rashid v. Rashid Zar and 4 others (PLD 2010 Karachi 119) and Miss Benazir Bhutto v. Federation of Pakistan and another (PLD 1988 SC 416)
and submits that this Hon.ble Court cannot ignore the reality that what would happen when a Dharna is called. Learned Attorney General for Pakistan submits that it is the duty of the Court to interfere for protection of rights of citizens of Pakistan so as to ensure that the freedom available to citizen is not curtailed by any person or any political organization.
9.
Learned counsel for respondents No.4 and 5 submit that there Chairmen/Heads of the parties are ready to ensure that the
protest, Long March, Inqlab March or Dharna will be peaceful and free of violence.
10.
We have watched the interview of Mr. Imran Khan, the Chairman of P.T.I. dated 4th of July 2014 with Mr.Javaid Chaudhry, anchor person of Express Television Channel in the presence of learned counsel for the parties in the open Court. Mr. Imran Khan, the Chairman P.T.I. has categorically stated that if four constituencies of National Assembly were opened for inspection and auditing and a commission be constituted under the Chairmanship of
the Hon.ble Chief Justice of Pakistan and the Hon.ble Commission
would complete the inspection and checking process within two weeks, he would call off the Long March. The Prime Minster of Pakistan in his address to the nation dated 12.8.2014 has accepted the offer of the Chairman P.T.I. but he in his press conference in response to the address of Prime Minister has refused to accept his offer rather he used contemptuous language by saying that in the presence of Prime Minster of Pakistan, the Commission will not be able to perform his duties independently. On the said statement, learned Attorney General for Pakistan has taken serious exceP.T.I.ons and submits that a contempt notice be issued to the Chairman P.T.I..
11. We have gone through the record available with us and also watched the national address of the Prime Minister of Pakistan as well as interview of Mr.Imran Khan, the Chairman P.T.I. with Mr.Javaid Cuahdhry, an anchor person dated 4th of July 2014 and prima facie we are convinced that demands raised by the Chairman
P.T.I. and Chairman P.A.T. as mentioned in paragraph No.1 hereinabove read with statement of learned counsel for respondent No.4 referred in para No.3 above are in violation of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 and as such for resolving the important constitutional issue, we admit this petition for regular hearing, observing that any violation of the Constitution by the protestors and their leaders would expose them to the legal consequences and direct respondents No.4 and 5 as under:
The respondents No.4 and 5 (Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf P.T.I. and Pakistan Awami Tehreek P.A.T.) are restrained meanwhile from launching Azadi March, Inqlab March or holding Dharna at Islamabad, in any unconstitutional way, keeping in view the sanctity of the independence day and the current chaotic and uncertain situation prevailing in the Country.
12. Parties are directed to file written statement and necessary documents if any. Relist on 12.09.2014.
(Shahid Hameed Dar)(Muhammad Khalid Mehmood Khan) Judge Judge
(Muhammad Anwaarul Haq) Judge
*KMSubhani*
Approved for reporting.
