Mazari vs Asif: Counsel asked to explain if remarks were criminal

Court wants to hear arguments over legal position in the matter

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court Thursday directed counsels for a parliamentarian to assist the court in helping it to determine under what law derogatory remarks made by the defence minister on the floor of the National Assembly constitute a criminal act.

Minister Khawaja Asif had passed derogatory remarks about Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s Dr Shireen Mazari on the floor of the assembly in June 2016.

Mazari is an MNA on a reserved seat for women.

On Thursday, a division bench comprising Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui and Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani directed Mazari’s counsel, Shoaib Razzaq, to argue over the legal position in the matter as the remarks had been expunged from the assembly’s proceedings.



The bench issued the instructions while hearing the Intra-Court Appeal (ICA) of Dr Mazari seeking the IHC’s intervention to create an exception in Article 69 and reinterpret its provision for the protection of women on the floor of the assembly.

Razzaq argued before the bench that Asif, while pointing towards Mazari, had asked the speaker to “order this tractor-trolley to shut her mouth”, when she and some other lawmakers were protesting against his speech on load shedding during Ramazan.

He added that Asif had said that “she cannot manage her family”, to create the impression that her home life was out of order, and that would somehow make her unable to properly represent her constituency.

“Make her voice more feminine,” Asif was also reported to have said.

Razzaq added that an application was filed before the privilege committee of the national assembly and to the ministry of law as well but to no avail.



The court, however, directed the counsel to provide assistance through his arguments whether the alleged misbehaviour could be termed as a criminal act.

The bench remarked that Islam teaches respect for women, and the court would hear and decide the case with due respect.

In the petition, Razzaq had contended that Asif had made the derogatory remarks against the petitioner, which were duly televised and watched by millions around the world, while video clips of the incident were still available on certain social media forums.

He further contended that the remarks were criminal in nature as Asif had defamed Mazari, which falls under section 500 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860. Moreover, he verbally harassed the parliamentarian which created a hostile working environment for her – constituting an offence under The Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2010.

“We have made rights for woman in every corner of law, have made special provisions for them, gave them special statuses, have reserved seats for them in the assembly, yet the irony is the same women who have vehemently fought for the ‘The Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act 2010’ has failed today by the archaic interpretation and implementation of Article 69.”



Razzaq further stated in the petition that the purpose of the parliamentary privilege under Article 69 (Courts not to inquire into the proceedings of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) of the Constitution is to enable the parliamentarians to go about its business but Asif’s comments were personal and criminal in nature and should not be sheltered under the cloak of Article 69.

In the petition, while applying a dogmatic approach, he argued the petitioner does not want to unintentionally challenge the sanctity of parliament or become a hindrance to the legislatures when it comes to their supreme work.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 13^th, 2017.