ISLAMABAD - The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Wednesday turned down a petition filed by Chairman Amun Taraqqi Party (ATP) Muhammad Faiq Shah challenging the permission granted by the Deputy Commissioner to the organizers to hold Aurat March at F-9 Park. A single bench of IHC comprising Chief Justice of IHC Justice Aamer Farooq conducted hearing of the petition and termed it as non-maintainable after hearing the arguments made by the petitioner’s counsel Nazakat Hussain Abbasi.
The petitioner stated in the petition that Aurat March scheduled to be held on 08.03.2023 is provocative and undermining to Islamic and social norms, thus the NOC granted upon it be cancelled. He mentioned in the petition that Islamabad Deputy Commissioner (DC) had allowed the National Commission on the Status of Women on March 2 to hold the march at F-9 Park on Wednesday. He requested the court that the DC’s permission may be revoked and that the organizers be directed to not violate the “injunctions of Islam [and] Islamic way of life while holding Aurat March.”
Shah challenged the permission claiming that the march would “not only spoil the basic family structure of an Islamic state but also promote vulgarity.” He further argued that March 8 also coincided with the “Holy day of Shab-eBarat” (a religious occasion observed by Muslims), implying that the coinciding events could for reasons unexplained not be observed simultaneously. During the hearing, Advocate Abbasi said that according to Article 2 (Islam to be state religion) of the Constitution, the state’s religion is Islam. He said that the district administration Islamabad had also ignored the Article-16 (freedom of assembly) while granting the permission of the said march.
He said that objectionable sentences used to be written on placards carried by the marchers. At this, the IHC Chief Justice said that banners and placards are a matter of the past. He further raised the question that has freedom of assembly (Article 16) of the Constitution not given them (women) this right (to march)? Advocate Abbasi responded that there have been some restrictions imposed in freedom of assembly (article 16). He added that such a thing is not possible in an Islamic state. On the completion of the advocate’s argument, the IHC bench reserved its verdict and later dismissed the petition by terming it as non-maintainable.