IHCBA files plea in SC against ‘road blocks’

The Supreme Court has fixed a constitutional petition for Wednesday (today) filed by the Islamabad High Court Bar Association (IHCBA) requesting it to direct the executive authorities to unblock the roads and highways and not to create any hindrance in the movement of citizens in any part of the country.

A three-judge bench of the apex court, led by Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan and comprising Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, will take up the petition filed by IHCBA President Shoaib Shaheen.

Interestingly, the three judges are the part of the larger bench hearing the suo motu case on the alleged political interference in the affairs of prosecution and investigation in high-profile cases. The same bench had suspended the Lahore High Court’s judgment against Ravi Rural Urban Development Project. It is also hearing a PTI petition against the delimitation process of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan and Justice Munib Akhtar were part of the larger bench, which had declared then National Assembly deputy speaker’s ruling as unconstitutional. They had also held that defecting lawmakers’ votes could not be counted.

Also read: ‘Azadi March’: PTI workers asked to converge at Lahore’s Batti Chowk

The majority of the superior bars representatives are close to the PML-N-led coalition government. However, the IHCBA president belongs to the Hamid Khan Group, which is a rival group of the Asma Jahangir Group. The latter is close to the coalition government.

Senior lawyers are wondering why the bar was approaching the apex court when the Islamabad High Court had already given relief to PTI activists. They say that it is yet to become clear that the bench will pass an appropriate order in view of the SC judgment in the Faizabad sit-in case.

However, PTI lawyers have expressed complete satisfaction over the composition of bench hearing the bar’s petition.

It has been learnt that the PTI would also move an application in the apex court for producing evidence to establish the government's alleged unlawful action against party leaders and supporters.

The IHCBA petition read that the association firmly believed in the supremacy of the Constitution, rule of law and had always strived and struggled for the protection of the fundamental rights of the citizens of Pakistan.

It contended that the roads and highways were being blocked by different state institutions and executive authorities. It added that because of this action, advocates and others citizens including doctors were unable to reach their destinations.

Also read: Govt to stop PTI's long march: Rana Sanaullah

“The learned Advocates were also stuck on the highways/roads for a long period and were even unable to approach this Honourable Court which has caused a deprivation of the fundamental rights of citizens of Pakistan and also a hindrance in the access to justice.”

The petition noted that freedom of movement was the fundamental right of every citizen of Pakistan and all executive authorities, state agencies and public functionaries were bound to obey the Constitution.

“All the [PTI] protestors are also bound to not disturb or violate the fundamental rights of the other citizens of Pakistan and abide by the provisions of the Constitution and law and not to create a situation of law and order,” it read.

"That it has also been reported in the press and the electronic media that the citizens of Pakistan including the advocates, the parliamentarians and suspected protesters as well as the workers of one political party are being arrested, harassed without any reasonable and lawful justification and violating the fundamental rights of the citizens of Pakistan, which is illegal, unlawful, contrary to the provisions of the Constitution. The instant constitutional petition has been filed for [the] protection of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 because the instant matter relates to the matter of public importance involving fundamental rights."