The Supreme Court of Pakistan is scheduled to resume the hearing of review petitions challenging its verdict on the 2017 sit-in by Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) at Faizabad in Islamabad. The three-judge bench, led by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Qazi Faez Isa, will hear the petitions on September 28. The review pleas were filed by the Ministry of Defence, Intelligence Bureau, PTI, Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, and Pemra.
The judgement, authored by Justice Isa before he became the Chief Justice, had instructed the defence ministry and the tri-services chiefs to take action against personnel who violated their oath. It also directed the federal government to monitor and prosecute individuals advocating hate, extremism, and terrorism. The verdict had criticized several government departments for inconveniencing the public during the 20-day sit-in, which paralyzed life in Islamabad and Rawalpindi.
The Defence Ministry’s review petition argues that there is no evidence linking the armed forces to the sit-in or any particular outcome of the 2018 elections. It also requests the court to revoke any explicit or implicit observations about the armed forces and the Inter-services Intelligence (ISI). The ministry claims that foreign intelligence agencies have created a false perception that Pakistan and its armed forces support extremist organizations.
The Intelligence Bureau’s review petition asks the court to set aside the observations against the department. The agency, responsible for state security, claims that the verdict paints a negative picture of its activities, suggesting it engages in unlawful actions and politics. The department asserts that it was in close contact with the federal and Punjab governments during the sit-in and provided advance warnings about TLP’s plans and intentions.
The PTI’s petition questions the verdict’s mention of its joint sit-in with Pakistan Awami Tehreek in 2014. The party argues that the inclusion gives the impression that the PTI conducted an illegal protest for publicity and made false allegations. The party asserts that the 2014 sit-in was held for genuine reasons and in compliance with fundamental rights.
Sheikh Rashid Ahmed has filed a petition to remove his name from the judgement, claiming that its content could negatively impact his life. If his request is not accepted, Mr. Rashid argues that he will suffer adverse consequences.