ISLAMABAD:
All eyes on the Supreme Court, which is going to take up the federal government’s contempt petition against deposed premier Imran Khan on Thursday (today) over the violation of its May 25 order wherein his party, the PTI, was restricted from holding its Azadi March near Peshawar Mor between the H-9 and G-9 areas of Islamabad.
However, Imran and his supporters did make their way towards D-Chowk, prompting the government to summon the army for the security of the capital's Red Zone.
A five-judge larger bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, would take up the contempt petition.
The government, in its contempt petition, has also requested for a restraining order against Imran from creating a perceived law and order situation through his upcoming second long march to Islamabad's D-Chowk.
Read more: PTI long march: Imran opens up on imposition of martial law
Generally, it is said that the contempt issue was always between the court and contemnor, but this matter was a unique one because of several reasons.
First, only one member of the bench, Justice Afridi, had already noted that a contempt notice should be issued against Imran.
The other four members of the bench had showed restrain and sought agencies' reports to verify the allegation of the involvement of the PTI leaders, especially its chairman, in instigating party activists to reach Islamabad's D-Chowk in violation of the court’s order.
The agencies have already submitted their reports to the court four months ago.
Now, the interior ministry in its application claimed that the agencies' reports had unequivocally established that Imran flouted the court’s May 25 directions and persisted in exhorting the PTI activists and supporters to reach D-Chowk.
The application added that the PTI chief had claimed that he would also reach there.
The violation of the court's order comes under the purview of civil contempt.
Read more: Imran gives govt 'some more time', threatens march if elections not called
The bench might issue a notice to Imran to submit his response on the violation of the May 25 order.
However, in criminal law, evidence should be beyond doubt that the contemnor had violated the court order.
Despite a malicious campaign against him, CJP Bandial showed restraint and did not issue a contempt notice to anyone.
However, this is a civil contempt matter wherein the court usually takes a strict view for upholding the rule of law.
Even one prime minister, Yousuf Raza Gilani, was convicted for the violation of the SC's December 16, 2009 judgment in the NRO case.
However, before the conviction, the court had given him several opportunities to comply with the order.
It has been learnt that Imran was going to file a petition for a probe into the recent video leaks on Friday (tomorrow).
The draft of the petition has been prepared but it is on hold to just observe Thursday's proceedings in the contempt matter.
Presently, the superior judiciary has found itself navigating through the enormous challenges of adjudicating cases of political nature in a polity that was being increasingly gobbled up by unsparing polarisation.
The challenges for the current SC are different as it is facing the battle of perception.
During the tenure of ex-CJP Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, the PPP was accusing the judiciary of weakening its regime by interfering in matters which had political consequences.
Similarly, ex-CJP Mian Saqib Nisar was accused of giving a tough time to the PML-N.
Currently, the Supreme Court is divided on idealogical lines as the PTI is comfortable before one section of judges, while some are in the good books of the PML-N and its supporters.
In the prevailing situation, it is a challenge for this bench as to how it ends the contempt matter.
A similar scenario was witnessed during Punjab Assembly deputy speaker's ruling case wherein the PML-N and its allies had boycotted the SC proceedings on account of its refusal to form a full court to hear the matter.
It is witnessed that whenever the SC passes an order in favour of one political party, the rivals start campaigning against the judges.
It must be noted that the superior courts had already initiated contempt proceedings against Imran twice in one decade. Recently, the Islamabad High Court had withdrawn a contempt notice against him.
However, the present matter is that of civil contempt, which is different from the other two.
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