Three-day deadline: SC orders crackdown on illicit arms, smuggling

SC bench directs all orders to be dispatched to the prime minister, Balochistan governor and chief minister.


Mohammad Zafar September 09, 2012

QUETTA:


The Supreme Court has given the Frontier Corps (FC) three days to crack down on illegal weapons and smuggled vehicles in Balochistan.


Resuming the hearing of the Balochistan law and order petition at the SC’s Quetta registry on Saturday, the three-member bench comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Justice Jawwad S Khawaja and Justice Khilji Arif Hussain, also directed that all orders passed henceforth by the court be dispatched to the prime minister along with the governor and chief minister of Balochistan.

During proceedings, the bench questioned the defence secretary as to whether security and intelligence agencies could lawfully issue permits for firearms and unregistered vehicles. In response, the latter said a high-level meeting will be called to address the issue, adding that in the meanwhile, the Balochistan police Inspector General (IG) had been asked to arrest all permit holders.

Meanwhile, Quetta CCPO Mir Zubair told the court that the police and Special Branch could not issue transit permits and alleged that the intelligences agencies, including Inter-Services Intelligence and Military Intelligence, were issuing them instead.

Absentees in proceedings

Noting the absence of Kaho Bugti and the FC commandant in Saturday’s proceedings, CJ Chaudry asked FC counsel Raja Irshad where the official and the missing person were.

Irshad replied that the FC commandant had been in Malakand and could not reach proceedings as he was travelling by road. He added that the official’s leave had been cancelled as well following his statement that Kaho Bugti was not in FC custody.

The response from the FC counsel led the CJ to remark that the commandant could be court martialed for disobeying a direct court order. He directed the lawyer present the leave cancellation order before the court.

At this, Irshad maintained he could not represent FC any further. He added that since FC was a federal force, it should be represented by the Attorney General. CJ Chaudhry termed his reply ‘his personal matter’.

Meanwhile, Advocate General Amanullah Kanrani informed the bench that the federal law secretary could not be present in the hearing since he was busy with the Indian delegation in Islamabad. He maintained that the missing persons list will be finalised within days.

Irked by the absences, CJ Chaudhry warned officials to improve their state of affairs, especially in light of the UN delegation imminent visit to Balochistan to review the missing persons situation. He further directed that the names of all 22 agencies active in the province be submitted to the court.

The hearing was adjourned till September 19. All subsequent hearings will be conducted in Islamabad.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 9th, 2012.

COMMENTS (3)

A J Khan | 11 years ago | Reply

Some inconsistency in the remarks and orders of the court are listed below. 1. Only a day earlier, CJ was not happy with giving of Police Powers to FC, and on the next day his whole expectations are from FC to arrest and the Supreme Court has given the Frontier Corps (FC) three days to crack down on illegal weapons and smuggled vehicles in Balochistan. 2. When the FC says that it does not have a terrorist in its possession, it is not believed, but when terrorists with an alibi say so, it is believed. 3. Court Martial is a command decision. Supreme Court has also taken over command of the Armed Forces also and threatened to court martial the commandant for travelling by road to obey the orders of the court and failing to produce a terrorist who may be in Farari or terrorist camp in Afghanistan planning to attack someone in Pakistan. 4. The Lawyer of the FC is being frustrated so that he should not be able to carry on, while there are ample to be devil’s advocate. 5. Sufficient allegations have been staged against FC by the terrorists and their lawyers. The same has been taken as such without proof by the Court, thus making a strong case for UN against Pakistan.

Salma | 11 years ago | Reply

deweaponization of a Baloch Pashtun society ? strange indeed. The focus should be on demilitarization if want to solve the issues.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ