Faizabad sit-in: Elements propagating hate, extremism must be prosecuted, says SC
Top court says person who issues 'fatwa' which puts people in harm's way must be criminally prosecuted
Members of the Tehreek-e-Labaik Pakistan gather during the 2017 sit-in in. PHOTO: REUTERS.
ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday announced its verdict in the suo motu case regarding the 2017 Faizabad sit-in staged by the Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP).
The two-member bench comprising Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Mushir Alam directed the federal and provincial governments to monitor all elements "advocating hate, extremism and terrorism and prosecute the perpetrators in accordance with the law".
As per the written verdict authored by Justice Qazi Faez Isa, the Supreme Court has ruled that any "person issuing an edict or fatwa, which harms another or puts another in harm’s way, must be criminally prosecuted under the Pakistan Penal Code, the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and/or the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016."
The verdict directed intelligence agencies (including ISI, IB and MI) and the ISPR to not exceed their constitutional mandate.
Directing the state’s security apparatus to not interfere with broadcasts and publications, the court further instructed the intelligence agencies to monitor “all those who threaten the territorial integrity of the country and all those who undermine the security of the people and the State by resorting to or inciting violence”.
The two-member bench, in its verdict, suggested that “it would be appropriate to enact laws which clearly stipulate the respective mandates of the intelligence agencies” to ensure transparency.
Parliament’s supremacy is at risk, says SC judge
"The Government of Pakistan through the Ministry of Defence and the respective Chiefs of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force are directed to initiate action against the personnel under their command who are found to have violated their oath."
The full verdict is as follows:
(1) Subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by law, citizens have the right to form and to be members of political parties.
(2) Every citizen and political party has the right to assemble and protest provided such assembly and protest is peaceful and complies with the law imposing reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order. The right to assemble and protest is circumscribed only to the extent that it infringes on the fundamental rights of others, including their right to free movement and to hold and enjoy property.
(3) Protesters who obstruct people’s right to use roads and damage or destroy property must be proceeded against in accordance with the law and held accountable.
(4) The Constitution earmarks the responsibilities of the Election Commission which it must fulfill. If a political party does not comply with the law governing political parties then the Election Commission must proceed against it in accordance with the law. The law is most certainly not cosmetic as contended on behalf of the Election Commission.
(5) All political parties have to account for the source of their funds in accordance with the law.
(6) The State must always act impartially and fairly. The law is applicable to all, including those who are in government and institutions must act independently of those in government.
Govt told to submit rules governing secret agency
(7) When the State failed to prosecute those at the highest echelons of government who were responsible for the murder and attempted murder of peaceful citizens on the streets of Karachi on 12th May, 2007 it set a bad precedent and encouraged others to resort to violence to achieve their agendas.
(8) A person issuing an edict or fatwa, which harms another or puts another in harm’s way, must be criminally prosecuted under the Pakistan Penal Code, the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and/or the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016.
(9) Broadcasters who broadcast messages advocating or inciting the commission of an offence violate the PEMRA Ordinance and the terms of their licences and must be proceeded against by PEMRA in accordance with the law.
(10) Cable operators who stopped or interrupted the broadcast of licenced broadcasters must be proceeded against by PEMRA in accordance with the PEMRA Ordinance, and if this was done on the behest of others then PEMRA should report those so directing the cable operators to the concerned authorities.
(11) Those spreading messages through electronic means which advocate or incite the commission of an offence are liable to be prosecuted under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016.
(12) All intelligence agencies (including ISI, IB and MI) and the ISPR must not exceed their respective mandates. They cannot curtail the freedom of speech and expression and do not have the authority to interfere with broadcasts and publications, in the management of broadcasters/publishers and in the distribution of newspapers.
(13) Intelligence agencies should monitor activities of all those who threaten the territorial integrity of the country and all those who undermine the security of the people and the State by resorting to or inciting violence.
(14) To best ensure transparency and the rule of law it would be appropriate to enact laws which clearly stipulate the respective mandates of the intelligence agencies.
(15) The Constitution emphatically prohibits members of the Armed Forces from engaging in any kind of political activity, which includes supporting a political party, faction or individual. The Government of Pakistan through the Ministry of Defence and the respective Chiefs of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force are directed to initiate action against the personnel under their command who are found to have violated their oath.
(16) The police and other law enforcement agencies are directed to develop standard plans and procedure with regard to how best to handle rallies, protests and dharnas, and ensure that such plans/procedures are flexible enough to attend to different situations. It is clarified that though the making of such plans/procedures is not within the jurisdiction of this Court however we expect that in the maintenance of law and order every effort will be taken to avoid causing injury and loss of life.
(17) We direct the Federal and provincial governments to monitor those advocating hate, extremism and terrorism and prosecute the perpetrators in accordance with the law.
Justice Isa concluded the written verdict by quoting Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah: "I consider it my duty to call upon the Muslims to temper their resentment with reason and to beware of the dangers which may well overwhelm their own State.
"Should they allow their feelings of the moment to gain mastery over their actions. It is of utmost importance that Pakistan should be kept free from disorder, because the outbreak of lawlessness… is bound to shake… its foundation and cause irreparable damage to its future.
"I pray to God that He who has bestowed on us this great boon of a sovereign State, may now give our people courage to… preserve intact the peace of Pakistan for the sake of Pakistan."
The bench had reserved judgement on November 22 last year, a year after initiating suo motu proceedings on November 21, 2017.
The bench conducted several hearings and examined both role of the intelligence agencies particularly the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), as well as conduct of the TLP.
Interestingly, hearings of the case were not held for four months when the TLP was busy in campaigning for the July 25, 2018 general elections. The bench resumed hearing of the case in October 2018 and later raised a question about registration of the TLP as a political party.
During the November hearings, Justice Isa had lamented that supremacy and sovereignty of parliament was continuously being undermined, and asked if the country’s future would be determined by the parliament or ‘insidious forces’.
Justice Isa had made it clear that ‘every force’ in the country is subservient to the Constitution and if anyone is not then it is a ‘traitor’ in view of Article 5 and 6 of Constitution. “Are we living in a police state? We have already lost half the country,” he had remarked.
The judge had also inquired about the ‘force’ that decides which channels can be run and which cannot.
“I will not live in a state of fear. If freedom of speech and access to information cannot be ensured then Article 19 and 19 (A) of the Constitution should be repealed. Do not make a mockery of the state. We have allowed controlled media state,” he said.
Expressing concern over the present state of affairs, Justice Isa had said Pakistan did not come into being through a battle but because of constitutional minds of Quaid-e-Azam, Liaquat Ali Khan and his father. “No bullet was fired during the movement as pen, paper and tongue were used.”
The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday announced its verdict in the suo motu case regarding the 2017 Faizabad sit-in staged by the Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP).
The two-member bench comprising Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Mushir Alam directed the federal and provincial governments to monitor all elements "advocating hate, extremism and terrorism and prosecute the perpetrators in accordance with the law".
As per the written verdict authored by Justice Qazi Faez Isa, the Supreme Court has ruled that any "person issuing an edict or fatwa, which harms another or puts another in harm’s way, must be criminally prosecuted under the Pakistan Penal Code, the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and/or the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016."
The verdict directed intelligence agencies (including ISI, IB and MI) and the ISPR to not exceed their constitutional mandate.
Directing the state’s security apparatus to not interfere with broadcasts and publications, the court further instructed the intelligence agencies to monitor “all those who threaten the territorial integrity of the country and all those who undermine the security of the people and the State by resorting to or inciting violence”.
The two-member bench, in its verdict, suggested that “it would be appropriate to enact laws which clearly stipulate the respective mandates of the intelligence agencies” to ensure transparency.
Parliament’s supremacy is at risk, says SC judge
"The Government of Pakistan through the Ministry of Defence and the respective Chiefs of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force are directed to initiate action against the personnel under their command who are found to have violated their oath."
The full verdict is as follows:
(1) Subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by law, citizens have the right to form and to be members of political parties.
(2) Every citizen and political party has the right to assemble and protest provided such assembly and protest is peaceful and complies with the law imposing reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order. The right to assemble and protest is circumscribed only to the extent that it infringes on the fundamental rights of others, including their right to free movement and to hold and enjoy property.
(3) Protesters who obstruct people’s right to use roads and damage or destroy property must be proceeded against in accordance with the law and held accountable.
(4) The Constitution earmarks the responsibilities of the Election Commission which it must fulfill. If a political party does not comply with the law governing political parties then the Election Commission must proceed against it in accordance with the law. The law is most certainly not cosmetic as contended on behalf of the Election Commission.
(5) All political parties have to account for the source of their funds in accordance with the law.
(6) The State must always act impartially and fairly. The law is applicable to all, including those who are in government and institutions must act independently of those in government.
Govt told to submit rules governing secret agency
(7) When the State failed to prosecute those at the highest echelons of government who were responsible for the murder and attempted murder of peaceful citizens on the streets of Karachi on 12th May, 2007 it set a bad precedent and encouraged others to resort to violence to achieve their agendas.
(8) A person issuing an edict or fatwa, which harms another or puts another in harm’s way, must be criminally prosecuted under the Pakistan Penal Code, the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and/or the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016.
(9) Broadcasters who broadcast messages advocating or inciting the commission of an offence violate the PEMRA Ordinance and the terms of their licences and must be proceeded against by PEMRA in accordance with the law.
(10) Cable operators who stopped or interrupted the broadcast of licenced broadcasters must be proceeded against by PEMRA in accordance with the PEMRA Ordinance, and if this was done on the behest of others then PEMRA should report those so directing the cable operators to the concerned authorities.
(11) Those spreading messages through electronic means which advocate or incite the commission of an offence are liable to be prosecuted under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016.
(12) All intelligence agencies (including ISI, IB and MI) and the ISPR must not exceed their respective mandates. They cannot curtail the freedom of speech and expression and do not have the authority to interfere with broadcasts and publications, in the management of broadcasters/publishers and in the distribution of newspapers.
(13) Intelligence agencies should monitor activities of all those who threaten the territorial integrity of the country and all those who undermine the security of the people and the State by resorting to or inciting violence.
(14) To best ensure transparency and the rule of law it would be appropriate to enact laws which clearly stipulate the respective mandates of the intelligence agencies.
(15) The Constitution emphatically prohibits members of the Armed Forces from engaging in any kind of political activity, which includes supporting a political party, faction or individual. The Government of Pakistan through the Ministry of Defence and the respective Chiefs of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force are directed to initiate action against the personnel under their command who are found to have violated their oath.
(16) The police and other law enforcement agencies are directed to develop standard plans and procedure with regard to how best to handle rallies, protests and dharnas, and ensure that such plans/procedures are flexible enough to attend to different situations. It is clarified that though the making of such plans/procedures is not within the jurisdiction of this Court however we expect that in the maintenance of law and order every effort will be taken to avoid causing injury and loss of life.
(17) We direct the Federal and provincial governments to monitor those advocating hate, extremism and terrorism and prosecute the perpetrators in accordance with the law.
Justice Isa concluded the written verdict by quoting Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah: "I consider it my duty to call upon the Muslims to temper their resentment with reason and to beware of the dangers which may well overwhelm their own State.
"Should they allow their feelings of the moment to gain mastery over their actions. It is of utmost importance that Pakistan should be kept free from disorder, because the outbreak of lawlessness… is bound to shake… its foundation and cause irreparable damage to its future.
"I pray to God that He who has bestowed on us this great boon of a sovereign State, may now give our people courage to… preserve intact the peace of Pakistan for the sake of Pakistan."
The bench had reserved judgement on November 22 last year, a year after initiating suo motu proceedings on November 21, 2017.
The bench conducted several hearings and examined both role of the intelligence agencies particularly the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), as well as conduct of the TLP.
Interestingly, hearings of the case were not held for four months when the TLP was busy in campaigning for the July 25, 2018 general elections. The bench resumed hearing of the case in October 2018 and later raised a question about registration of the TLP as a political party.
During the November hearings, Justice Isa had lamented that supremacy and sovereignty of parliament was continuously being undermined, and asked if the country’s future would be determined by the parliament or ‘insidious forces’.
Justice Isa had made it clear that ‘every force’ in the country is subservient to the Constitution and if anyone is not then it is a ‘traitor’ in view of Article 5 and 6 of Constitution. “Are we living in a police state? We have already lost half the country,” he had remarked.
The judge had also inquired about the ‘force’ that decides which channels can be run and which cannot.
“I will not live in a state of fear. If freedom of speech and access to information cannot be ensured then Article 19 and 19 (A) of the Constitution should be repealed. Do not make a mockery of the state. We have allowed controlled media state,” he said.
Expressing concern over the present state of affairs, Justice Isa had said Pakistan did not come into being through a battle but because of constitutional minds of Quaid-e-Azam, Liaquat Ali Khan and his father. “No bullet was fired during the movement as pen, paper and tongue were used.”