The board, headed by Justice Yawar Ali of the Lahore High Court (LHC), issued an order to this effect on Thursday after an in-camera hearing in which counsels for the government and the JuD presented their arguments.
Abdul Sattar Sahil, a law officer, appeared on behalf the Punjab Home Department and said the Punjab government detained Hafiz Saeed and his companions on the federal government’s directives after the United Nations placed the JuD on its list of terrorist outfits.
Hafiz Saeed, aides' house arrest extended for 90 more days
He claimed that Saeed’s release might create law and order situation and requested the board to extend the detention of the JuD leaders for security reasons.
Saeed’s counsel strongly opposed any continued detention and said the detention order was passed under the Maintenance of Public Order, 1960 with purely mala fide intention.
He also questioned the provincial law officer’s claim that the government was implementing the UN resolution, adding that the Supreme Court and the LHC had given several judgments that “Pakistan is a sovereign and independent state and local laws shall apply to its citizens”.
He said the Punjab government had also moved an application before the Federal Review Board (FRB) over the detention of his clients. “However, when the government felt that the FRB was not satisfied with its stance, it withdrew its application,” he added.
The board later accepted the government’s plea for extending detention of Saeed but turned the request for a similar extension in the detention of other JuD officials – Prof Zafar Iqbal, Mufti Abdur Rehman Abid, Maulana Ubaidullah Obaid and Qazi Kashif Niaz.
Hindus protest Hafiz Saeed’s house arrest
Earlier, when Saeed and his aides were brought – amid heightened security – in the LHC to appear before the board, JuD supporters and lawyers showered rose petals on them and chanted slogans in their favour.
Saeed and his four companions have been facing detention since January 30. They have moved the LHC against the detention as they claim that it is against their fundamental rights and in clear violation of the Constitution.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ