PTI Sept 27 protest: KP AG challenges plea’s maintainability, IHC’s jurisdiction

ISLAMABAD: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s advocate general on Friday challenged the maintainability of a petition seeking to restrain the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) from holding a planned September 27 protest in Islamabad, and questioned the Islamabad High Court’s jurisdiction to issue directions to provincial governments.

Advocate General Shah Faisal Utmankhel told a three-member IHC bench headed by Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar that the court’s jurisdiction was confined to the federal capital and did not extend to provincial officials outside Islamabad.

“This court has no jurisdiction,” Utmankhel said, adding that his role was to assist the court.

He said the IHC could not issue directions to officials in Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab and Balochistan.

“We respect all courts, including the court of the civil judge,” he said.

The bench, which also included Justice Muhammad Asif and Justice Muhammad Azam Khan, was hearing a petition filed by citizen Waqas Ahmed against the PTI’s planned protest.

The petitioner’s counsel objected to the KP advocate general’s contention and raised the issue of a notice issued under Article 27-A, arguing that it was served on the Attorney General for Pakistan rather than the advocate general.

Chief Justice Dogar told the counsel to allow the KP advocate general to complete his arguments.

“Now it is the turn of the KP advocate general. Let him speak,” the chief justice said.

The exchange followed a dispute over who had presented arguments on behalf of the petitioner at an earlier hearing.

The petitioner’s counsel said the attorney general, rather than the petitioner’s lawyer, had initially presented arguments. Utmankhel responded that the petitioner’s counsel had not presented the arguments himself and that the attorney general had argued on his behalf.

“What kind of argument is this? I presented arguments at the outset,” the petitioner’s counsel said.

The chief justice said the petitioner’s counsel had not been heard during the first hearing and should be allowed to speak.

“You have read my order. The arguments of the petitioner’s counsel are recorded in it,” Dogar said.

The petitioner’s counsel also referred to remarks made by the KP advocate general during Thursday’s hearing that the government wanted to strengthen the judiciary and questioned whether he had been speaking on behalf of the provincial government.

Utmankhel said he was appearing in his legal capacity and his responsibility was to assist the bench.

At one point, Dogar told the KP advocate general that the court would make its decision on the basis of the arguments presented before it.

“Whatever you say, we will give the decision accordingly,” the chief justice said.

The Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan, Islamabad’s inspector general of police, KP Chief Secretary Shahab Ali Shah and KP Additional Inspector General of Police Abbas Ahsan also appeared before the court.

The KP advocate general later asked the court to incorporate his arguments in the order sheet.

Punjab Advocate General Barrister Zaffarullah Khan argued that the IHC could issue directions concerning an action originating outside its territorial jurisdiction if that action had the potential to affect its jurisdiction.

Zaffarullah said he supported civil liberties but alleged that protesters in previous demonstrations had used weapons, resulting in casualties among police personnel.

Responding to the KP advocate general’s reference to remarks by Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz, Zaffarullah said the advocate general had no role in the chief minister’s political statements. He added that Maryam was not a party to the petition and her remarks had been cited out of context.

Sindh Advocate General Jawad Dero said the matter did not directly concern the Sindh government but assured the court that any directives would be implemented.

Balochistan Advocate General Adnan Basharat said large-scale protests could disrupt activities at educational institutions, hospitals, roads and highways. He also read excerpts from a 2019 Supreme Court judgment on the adverse impact of mass processions.

He asked the court to declare that no political party, provincial government or political leadership could obstruct the smooth functioning of daily life.

The PTI has announced a nationwide protest on September 27, demanding the release of party founder Imran Khan and calling for the supremacy of the Constitution.

The court adjourned further hearing until September 14.