Hanging sword: SHC to decide IG’s fate in contempt case today

Police ordered to provide security to Dr Zulfiqar Mirza during LG elections


Our Correspondent November 17, 2015
Express News screengrab of IG Sindh Ghulam Haider Jamali

KARACHI:


The Sindh High Court (SHC) is expected to announce today its verdict in the contempt proceedings initiated against Sindh's inspector general of police, Ghulam Haider Jamali, in a case relating to the siege of the high court's building and torture on the former home minister Dr Zulfiqar Mirza's guards and journalists by police commandos.


Court officials told The Express Tribune that notices have been, issued to IG Jamali, district South DIG, district South SSP, Special Security Unit SP and others to appear in court today.

Commandos of the Special Security Unit (SSU) had subjected to torture the private guards of Pakistan Peoples Party's (PPP) estranged leader during his appearance before the anti-terrorism court. They had also beaten up media personnel covering the hours-long siege of the high court building on March 23.

Taking serious notice of the incident, the SHC bench had issued show-cause notices to IG Jamali, then Karachi AIG Ghulam Qadir Thebo, DIG South Dr Jameel Ahmed, South SSP Chaudhry Asad, Special Security Unit SP Major (retd) Saleem to explain why contempt of court proceedings may not be initiated against them for flouting the court's order of not arresting Mirza and his supporters.

Former National Assembly speaker, Dr Fehmida Mirza, had filed a petition against the provincial government for allegedly withdrawing her husband's official security guards at the behest of PPP co-chairperson Asif Ali Zardari. She had said that her husband had exposed the corruption of the PPP leadership, due to which they were facing life threats.

She had pleaded the court to order the government to provide protection to her husband and family members. Later, the court had directed the Rangers to provide protection to the petitioner and her family members, while contempt proceedings were initiated against the top cop and other senior officers.

Provision of security

On Tuesday, the Sindh High Court (SHC) directed IGP Jamali to provide protection to Dr Zulfiqar Mirza during the local bodies' elections as the Rangers authorities had excused themselves from entertaining individual cases.

A division bench, headed by Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, gave this direction while disposing of a fresh petition filed by the former home minister, who had sought a direction for the paramilitary force to provide him and his family protection in the wake of threats to their lives.

Mirza had once again approached the court last week. The petitioner informed the judges that a bungled attempt was recently made on his life in Badin district due to his participation in the upcoming local government elections. He feared that there were grave threats to his life. The court was pleaded to order the Rangers director-general to provide security to the former home minister and his family members.

During Tuesday's proceedings, the Rangers' legal consultant, Habib Ahmed, said the paramilitary was already engaged in the operation against criminals in Karachi. He added that the Rangers personnel will be performing their duties during the upcoming local government polls, hence are unable to entertain individual requests.

A law officer, representing the provincial government, pointed out that no affidavit of the petitioner was filed with the petition. He added that the lawyer representing the petitioner had filed his own affidavit, which amounts to misconduct on part of the lawyer.

The two-judge bench disposed of the plea in view of the statements given by the Rangers' legal consultant and the provincial law officer.

They directed the IG police to ensure security is provided to the petitioner and his family during the polls in accordance with the law.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 18th, 2015.

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