The Islamabad High Court (IHC) ordered the police on Tuesday to recover Faizan Usman by September 4 (today) and present him in the court and instructed the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) to help the police track the missing person.
In a written order IHC Justice Babar Sattar ordered for identifying the persons behind the disappearance of Faizan. The judge also ordered the interior and defence secretaries, Islamabad police chief and the ISI sector commander to submit affidavits whether or not they knew the whereabouts of Faizan.
Father of Faizan Usman, who is the petitioner in the case, had submitted in the court that some people in uniform came in cars and searched his house. He added that he was told that his son had links with those associated with the banned organisation.
The petitioner stated that after carrying his son, he was threatened with consequences if he approached the law or went to the media. However, he added, two months had passed but his son had not returned. He further said that his son-in-law who was picked up earlier, was also missing.
He said that those people also took laptop, Macbook, and two iPhones. There were about 10 to 15 people, but they were not the police personnel, the petitioner stated, expressing his suspicion that they belonged to the spy agency. Therefore, he said, the defence ministry had been made a party to the case.
The court asked the ISI sector commander to assist the police in tracking Faizan's MacBook and mobile phone through the agency's surveillance system. It added that on non-recovery of Faizan, the parties should submit an affidavit within seven days, whether or not they know the whereabouts of Faizan.
Justice Sattar wrote that prima facie, Faizan Usman's disappearance was a case of enforced disappearance, while the Supreme Court and the high courts had declared that the acts of enforced disappearances were abhorrent and must end. The hearing was adjourned till Wednesday.
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