IHC seeks record of action against past court order violators ahead of PTI Sept 27 march
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday rejected the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) advocate general’s request for two days to prepare arguments in a petition challenging the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) planned September 27 long march, and sought by Friday a record of action taken against those who had previously violated court orders.
Chief Justice Sardar Sarfraz Dogar, heading a larger bench comprising Justice Muhammad Azam Khan and Justice Muhammad Asif, said higher court orders had been violated in the past and stressed the IHC’s constitutional responsibility to protect the rights of Islamabad’s residents.
“This is the Islamabad High Court, and it has constitutional protection to safeguard the rights of the citizens of Islamabad. This court cannot allow anyone to violate the rights of the citizens of Islamabad,” Chief Justice Dogar remarked.
The petition, filed by citizen Waqas Ahmed, argued that the PTI’s planned September 27 protest and long march could affect his business in Islamabad. His lawyer raised concerns over the possible use of government machinery and referred to the party’s previous attempt to enter the capital in 2024.
The bench asked whether the 2024 order had been challenged before any court and whether the K-P chief secretary and inspector general of police were bound by it.
In November 2024, the IHC had ruled that no protest, rally or sit-in could be held in Islamabad in violation of the Peaceful Assembly and Public Order Act, 2024. The court directed the Interior Ministry to engage PTI leadership to resolve the matter while ordering the authorities to maintain law and order and protect public life and foreign dignitaries. The order came as PTI planned a November 24 protest in the capital, coinciding with a visit by the Belarusian president and a 65-member delegation.
Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan told the court today that, to the best of his information, the order had not been challenged before any court.
The discussion centred on the use of government machinery and officials for political protests. The court observed that “government resources cannot be used for protests” and that “government officials cannot be used for protests”, asking who would be held responsible if its directions were violated.
Read: IHC forms larger bench to hear petition challenging PTI Sept 27 protest
Awan agreed that the K-P chief secretary and IGP were bound to implement the IHC’s 2024 order. “Yes, absolutely. They are bound to implement that order,” he said.
The attorney general maintained that no officer should comply with an order that was not in accordance with the Constitution and the law, while noting that it would be difficult for any officer not to comply with an order issued by the chief executive of a province.
The court, however, stressed the authority of its own directions, with Awan stating that “if this court issues an order, it will be binding on anyone holding an executive position”.
He further argued that the High Court could issue directions to anyone within its jurisdiction concerning citizens’ fundamental rights and said all provincial IGPs, being employees of the Police Service of Pakistan rather than the provinces, should be directed to abide by the Constitution.
The attorney general then drew the court’s attention to statements by public office holders, including the K-P chief minister, and other senior PTI figures regarding the proposed protest.
“Statements have come from important and responsible people within the party that they will besiege Islamabad,” Awan said, adding that statements by the K-P chief minister and others holding responsible positions could not be ignored.
He pointed to preparations for the proposed protest, saying reports suggested protesters, including the K-P chief minister, were coming with greater preparation than in 2024. He also referred to the chief minister’s statement that “we are coming with more preparation than in 2024”.
Read more: PTI finalises strategy for Sept 27 march
Awan recalled the violence during previous PTI protests, telling the court that 31 police personnel had been injured during the 2024 protest and that the army had been called in under Article 245.
He also referred to the May 2022 protest, when PTI founder Imran Khan had called workers to D-Chowk. Public property was damaged during the protest and the green belt in Blue Area was set on fire.
The attorney general said a clear assurance had been given before the Supreme Court in May 2022 but was subsequently violated. He added that the IHC’s 2024 order had also been violated.
Awan also referred to the current Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi’s minority opinion, given when he was a member of the bench, in favour of initiating contempt proceedings against the PTI founder. He said Afridi had made the founder’s statement part of his order.
The K-P advocate general was subsequently called to the rostrum.
Asked for the provincial government’s position, he said he did not even know what the petition was about as he had received the notice only the previous day. He also said the question of whether the petition was maintainable needed to be examined.
The advocate general questioned the characterisation of the proposed march as an attack.
“Why is this long march being considered an attack? This long march is in favour of the judiciary,” he said. CJ Dogar responded: “Thank you very much for wanting to strengthen the judiciary.”
“Is the judiciary so weak that you want to strengthen it?” the chief justice asked, adding: “The judiciary is not so weak that it needs the support of a political party.”
The K-P advocate general then argued that the IHC had repeatedly ordered meetings with the head of the political party but its orders had not been complied with. “Dozens of contempt of court petitions have already been filed,” he said.
The petitioner’s lawyer objected to the K-P advocate general’s appearance, asking whether he was representing a convicted prisoner.
The K-P advocate general sought two days to prepare his arguments, but the chief justice rejected the request, saying he could be given time only until Friday and should begin his arguments then.
The court also sought from the K-P advocate general a record of action taken in the past against those who had violated court orders. At the end of the hearing, the court issued fresh notices and directed all provincial IGPs, chief secretaries and other relevant officials to appear again on Friday.
The hearing was adjourned until Friday.
PTI gears up for September 27
The PTI announced the September 27 Islamabad march to press for the release of Imran Khan. The party had been preparing a central convoy from K-P, with caravans from other parts of the country expected to join before proceeding towards the federal capital.
Under a preliminary strategy announced in August, the party planned to bring workers from across the country to K-P at least five days before the march. The main convoy was expected to remain at the Punjab-Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa border for two to three days before moving towards Islamabad once other caravans had assembled.
The PTI had also planned protests and shutdowns in several major cities, including Lahore, Karachi, Hyderabad and Quetta, as well as demonstrations along important national highways.
CM Afridi subsequently intensified the mobilisation campaign during a visit to Karachi on Monday, calling on people in Sindh to join the September 27 protest.
Addressing lawyers at a convention organised under the Sindh High Court Bar Association, Afridi urged supporters to come to Karachi rather than travel to Islamabad and called for the city to remain closed for a week.
He said people from across Pakistan would take to the streets on September 27 and described the planned protest as a movement against what he called an unjust political system.
Afridi also criticised restrictions placed on his convoy as it travelled to Karachi, alleging that containers had been placed along its route and that PTI workers had been arrested.
The PTI’s August plan also included a funding and mobilisation structure for the protest. A committee headed by party Secretary-General Salman Akram Raja was tasked with overseeing finances, while lawmakers were directed to mobilise supporters in their constituencies.
The party had estimated that the first day of the march would cost around Rs450 million, with subsequent days expected to cost approximately Rs14.5 million each. It had also sought financial contributions from lawmakers and party figures to fund the campaign.