ISLAMABAD-The Islamabad High Court (IHC) will Monday (today) resume hearing of a case related to implementation of the court’s verdict on shifting of all animals at the Marghazar zoo to suitable sanctuaries. 
A single bench of IHC comprising Chief Justice of IHC Justice Athar Minallah will conduct hearing of the case wherein it had previously directed the Islamabad Wildlife Management Board to review its decision of not to transfer the two Himalayan bears to a sanctuary in Jordan. 
In this connection, the IHC bench had also directed the Secretary, Ministry of Climate Change to bring this order to the notice of Amin Aslam, Special Assistant to the Prime Minister. It also directed the Chairperson of the Board to inform the members of the Board about the court’s order. 
Justice Athar observed in his order that it would be appropriate to show restraint and allow the Board to review and take a decision in consonance with the jurisprudence enunciated by this court in its judgment and in the best interest of the bears. 
He stated that this court expects that the Board will take a decision in the best interest of the two helpless brown bears, inter alia, based on the opinion of internationally renowned experts and veterinarian. 
“Both the bears will not be removed from the jurisdiction of this Court and the Ministry of Climate Change and the Board will be responsible for their wellbeing and welfare because they have asserted before this Court that they have the ability to do so. The Board is directed to hold its meeting before the next date fixed i.e. 14- 12-2020 and inform this Court regarding its decision,” directed the IHC Chief Justice. 
In its order, the bench observed that it appears that neither the Ministry nor the Board have properly appreciated the judgment and jurisprudence of this Court. There is no plausible explanation for shifting the two Himalayan brown bears to be caged in another zoo which would not meet their social, physiological and behavioral needs. 
It added that there is also no satisfactory justification for changing the earlier decision of the Board. The Chairperson of the Board has unambiguously stated that the two tormented bears are now being well fed and looked after. 
It maintained, “If that is the case then why are they being shifted to another zoo? The earlier decision of relocating the two bears to a sanctuary in Jordan was taken by the Board and this Court was duly informed. The reasons for selection of the said sanctuary were described and the same were recorded by this Court in its order. The Ministry of Climate Change had also issued export permits.” 
The bench continued that without informing this court and, prima facie, in breach of its judgment the Board decided to relocate the two bears to another zoo outside the jurisdiction of this court. The Board on its own had entered into an arrangement with an international organization having expertise relating to care of the living species. 
The said organization namely, Four Paws has been assisting the Board in taking care of the neglected animal species. One of its representatives namely, Dr Amir Khalil has been advising the Board as an expert. 
He had a laudable role in taking care of ‘Kaavan’ and the latter’s transportation to a sanctuary in Cambodia would not have been possible but for him. 
In response to a query, Dr Amir informed that adequate facilities are not available in the zoo at Rawalpindi to meet the needs of the two brown bears. Years of neglect and the tumor of one of the bears requires special veterinary services and care. 
The IHC Chief Justice said that the decision appears to have been taken by the Board in haste and that too in violation of the judgment and orders of this court.