IHC to form larger bench over PTI's Sept 27 Islamabad protest

The Islamabad High Court decided on Tuesday to form a larger bench to hear a petition against Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf's planned Sept. 27 protest in Islamabad, amid concerns over government involvement and possible unrest. Chief Justice Sarfraz Dogar issued notices to top federal and provincial officials and adjourned the hearing until Sept. 10.

Why is IHC forming a larger bench for the PTI protest case?

The Islamabad High Court is forming a larger bench because it considers the PTI protest petition sensitive enough to qualify as a constitutional crisis. The case involves questions about government machinery, judicial independence and public order, prompting the court to summon senior federal and provincial officials in person.

What does the petition against PTI's protest argue?

Citizen Waqas Ahmed, who described himself as an Islamabad-based trader, filed the petition through his lawyer. The counsel argued that the protest was designed to pressure the government into securing relief for PTI leaders and workers with cases pending in court.

"I had also filed a petition on behalf of prisoners, but I was not granted the same relief," the counsel told the court.

The lawyer said the Constitution permits the government to impose lawful restrictions on protests and cited laws governing demonstrations in Islamabad. He also submitted newspaper clippings quoting the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa chief minister on the planned protest.

Did the government use official machinery in past PTI protests?

Chief Justice Dogar asked whether protesters would travel to Islamabad using the chief minister's vehicle and government machinery. The petitioner's counsel replied that they were indeed coming with government machinery.

The lawyer produced a Nov. 21, 2024, letter from the Ministry of Interior and alleged that government machinery was used during PTI's 2024 protest despite the ministry's own directions. No application has yet been submitted to the Islamabad district magistrate seeking permission for the Sept. 27 protest, he said.

The counsel also argued that the protest's stated goal, seeking relief for a convicted prisoner, overlapped with two cases already pending before the Islamabad High Court, including the £190 million case. He claimed the court had repeatedly asked the relevant side to argue the appeal, but no arguments had been presented.

What did the lawyer say about judicial independence?

"Can the government ask the court to suspend sentences in appeals if 2 million people are brought onto the streets?" the lawyer asked. He said the Constitution guarantees judicial independence and questioned the logic of taking pending court cases to the streets.

If people with pending cases were allowed to protest for relief, he argued, others across Pakistan could adopt the same approach. He referred to earlier PTI protests, alleging that participants tried to enter Islamabad in 2024 and claiming three Rangers personnel were killed during the unrest.

He questioned how such casualties could occur if protesters were unarmed and cited a newspaper report estimating the previous PTI protest caused losses of Rs240 million. "Why are such allegations made only against this political party and not against other political parties?" he asked.

What other concerns were raised in court?

The counsel raised concerns about a possible attack on Adiala Jail and asked whether a plan resembling the May 9 attack on General Headquarters was being contemplated. "If such things continue, how will the system of the country function?" he asked, calling the proposed protest "completely illegal."

He also referred to a planned protest in Sindh, saying provincial authorities had indicated they would facilitate it, and read out the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa chief minister's oath before the court. Given the case's sensitivity, the high court decided a larger bench should hear the petition and summoned senior federal and provincial officials to appear in person.