Dharna rights: PTI withdraws petition challenging IHC decision
Legal experts say move is tantamount to accepting initial verdict
While disposing petitions against the planned November 2 protest, Justice Siddiqui directed the administration to allow PTI Chairman Imran Khan and others to demonstrate at a designated place, provided the fundamental rights of citizens are protected. PHOTO: PPI
ISLAMABAD:
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) lawyers withdrew a petition challenging an Islamabad High Court order which directed the party to hold its protest at the Democracy Park and Speech Corner in the federal capital. Subsequently, a division bench of Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Miangul Hassan dismissed the petition.
Following the hearing, some legal experts at the IHC said withdrawing petition was tantamount to accepting the single bench’s order without any objection. They said a withdrawal at this stage means that the order of the single bench still holds and all parties are legally bound to protest at the designated area of the capital. PTI’s counsel Farrukh Dall, however, said the petition’s dismissal was limited to the extent of the petitioners in the instant case and had nothing to do with PTI. He said others can still challenge the decision.
“Aggrieved and dissatisfied” with Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui’s order of October 31, officials of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Lawyers Forum challenged the order, requesting the court change the decision.
While disposing petitions against the planned November 2 protest, Justice Siddiqui directed the administration to allow PTI Chairman Imran Khan and others to demonstrate at a designated place, provided the fundamental rights of citizens are protected.
In the order, he said if Imran Khan was willing to hold a demonstration at the prescribed location, the federal government and district administration would facilitate such activities.
Justice Siddiqui added the district administration must remain within the limits of law. He added the administration was bound to protect the rights of citizens and take remedial steps to ensure fundamental rights.
Petitioners Mohammad Bilal and Nasir Azeem approached the high court, asking that the order be set aside as the single bench did not pay any heed to petition and passed the judgment in a hasty manner.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 3rd, 2016.
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) lawyers withdrew a petition challenging an Islamabad High Court order which directed the party to hold its protest at the Democracy Park and Speech Corner in the federal capital. Subsequently, a division bench of Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Miangul Hassan dismissed the petition.
Following the hearing, some legal experts at the IHC said withdrawing petition was tantamount to accepting the single bench’s order without any objection. They said a withdrawal at this stage means that the order of the single bench still holds and all parties are legally bound to protest at the designated area of the capital. PTI’s counsel Farrukh Dall, however, said the petition’s dismissal was limited to the extent of the petitioners in the instant case and had nothing to do with PTI. He said others can still challenge the decision.
“Aggrieved and dissatisfied” with Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui’s order of October 31, officials of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Lawyers Forum challenged the order, requesting the court change the decision.
While disposing petitions against the planned November 2 protest, Justice Siddiqui directed the administration to allow PTI Chairman Imran Khan and others to demonstrate at a designated place, provided the fundamental rights of citizens are protected.
In the order, he said if Imran Khan was willing to hold a demonstration at the prescribed location, the federal government and district administration would facilitate such activities.
Justice Siddiqui added the district administration must remain within the limits of law. He added the administration was bound to protect the rights of citizens and take remedial steps to ensure fundamental rights.
Petitioners Mohammad Bilal and Nasir Azeem approached the high court, asking that the order be set aside as the single bench did not pay any heed to petition and passed the judgment in a hasty manner.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 3rd, 2016.