Drone attacks: Sehgal recommends Minto as amicus curiae

This was a human rights case which pertained to fundamental rights, says CJ Lahore High Court.

LAHORE:

The Lahore High Court Chief Justice (CJ) on Thursday asked the federal government’s lawyer how long people would have to wait for the parliament to act against drone attacks.

The CJ said this in response to Deputy Attorney General Yasmin Sehgal who has said that it was the parliament which had jurisdiction to act against drone attacks. She added that if the parliament does not take up the matter, the Supreme Court, but not the high courts, could hear the matter.

The CJ said this was a human rights case which pertained to fundamental rights. The high courts, he said, can hear a case when the fundamental rights of a person are affected by those far from him.

Sehgal suggested Abid Hasan Minto’s name as a possible amicus curiae. The CJ said Minto would be asked and if he consented, he would be appointed.

The court was holding proceedings on a petition moved by Jamatud Dawa (JuD) chief Hafiz Muhammad Saeed against US drone strikes in Pakistan.

Saeed’s lawyer AK Dogar said protecting the lives and properties of Pakistani citizens was the government’s responsibility. It was the judiciary’s duty to ask the government why it was not performing its constitutional duties, he said.

Dogar, citing the apex court’s judgment in Balochistan’s law and order case, argued that the court had declared that the provincial government had no right to rule. Saeed had sought direction to the federal government to make public information in all matters of public importance.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 15^th, 2013.