In what seems to be an expression of a lack of faith in the government, the Supreme Court has ordered that a committee headed by the chief justice of the Sindh High Court ensure implementation of the apex court’s verdict in the suo motu case on Karachi’s violence.
The court further expressed its support to the security forces if asked to obey “any illegal orders.” The bench said that the court must be informed if leniency is shown to criminals.
As the chief justice of Pakistan read out 127 pages of the much-awaited judgment, there was dead silence in courtroom 1. The five-member special bench said that violence in Karachi over the past year was not ethnic, but a result of turf wars between groups having conflicting economic, social and political interests. The groups are supported by political parties and elements within the provincial government as well as the executive, the bench said.
(Read: Karachi suo motu - Verdict out)
The court ruled out banning any political party, including the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, against whom most parties had voiced complaints. Political parties must denounce their affiliation with criminals and stop supporting them politically and financially, the bench said, warning of punitive action against any party or person who does not do so.
In its 156-page judgment, the court said the boundaries of administrative units like police stations and revenue estates, ought to be altered instead of allowing various groups to claim and declare certain areas as “no-go areas”. The court directed the provincial government and paramilitary Rangers to take strong and decisive action to eliminate such areas in Karachi.
The bench said the Sindh inspector-general of police, and if necessary, director-general Rangers can lead the operation against the “no-go areas.”
The verdict said that the “Karachi police must be depoliticised and strengthened to fulfil its duties, otherwise law and order problems are likely to aggravate soon after Rangers withdraw their assistance.”
“Karachi has to be cleansed from all kinds of weapons by adhering to laws available on the subject, and if need be, by promulgating a new legislation,” the verdict noted. All licensed arms required for security concerns or personal safety can be retained, but these must be registered with NADRA, the verdict said.
(Read: Armed to the teeth: ‘Karachi is a volcano - once it erupts the govt won’t be able to do anything’)
The court directed the provincial government to constitute a commission to assess the losses suffered by people and said financial compensation must be given in accordance to the commission’s recommendations.
A depoliticised investigation agency should investigate cases and witnesses must be provided protection so that they may act against criminals fearlessly. The apex court further directed that prosecutors, particularly anti-terrorism courts, be appointed in a transparent manner, in accordance to the Constitution.
The court has sought a report within one month from the Sindh IGP of all missing and killed police officers who took part in an operation in Karachi in 1992 and 1996, adding that the court must be informed whether their families were compensated or not. The court directed the Sindh government to submit copies of judicial inquiries instituted since 1985.
The five-member bench stressed that the government has failed to protect the fundamental rights of citizens guaranteed in Articles 9,14,15,18 and 24 of the Constitution, adding that the federal government has failed to protect the provincial government from internal disturbances in Sindh.
(Read: The Supreme Court on Karachi)
Published in The Express Tribune, October 7th, 2011.
COMMENTS (7)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Musharraf was right in his decisions.
@Danish: Get over your obsession and hate for MQM....
I only liked your joke, doesn't mean agree with your remarks. Well yes I do to some extent :)
So does this mean MQM won its case?
@Jameel: Dear Sir, I have failed to understand the meaning of your remarks. I think the Sc has done a fine job by pin pointing the real cause and taking steps to put some order.
This reminds me of the Mullah Naseeruddin joke where he told both contesting parties that they were both right; when a third person pointed out that the two can not be right at the same time Mullah replied you are right too.
I am guessing the judicial circus would soon be back in Islamabad.