However, the bench observed that protection of life, property and other rights of the citizens guaranteed under the Constitution have to be taken into consideration by the competent executive authorities while regulating the exercise of the right to assembly guaranteed under Article 16 of the Constitution.
A single bench of IHC comprising Chief Justice of IHC Justice Athar Minallah made the observation in his written order issued after hearing the petition moved by Asma Malik, a citizen residing in the Islamabad Capital Territory.
She invoked the jurisdiction of the court through his counsel Malik Muhammad Haseeb Advocate and asserted that her security as well as that of other inhabitants of the capital is at grave risk on account of the calls given by the political leaders to hold public meetings at D Chowk Islamabad. Her counsel argued that there is an imminent and serious risk of harm to the citizens and their properties.
The IHC bench noted that Article 9 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 guarantees that no person shall be deprived of life or liberty in accordance with law.
It added: Simultaneously, Article 16 provides that every citizen shall have the right to assemble peacefully and without arms, subject to any reasonable restriction imposed by law in the interest of public order. Likewise, Article 15 guarantees to every citizen the right to freedom of movement. No doubt the constitutionally guaranteed right under Article 9 is of paramount importance. It is the duty of the State and its public functionaries to ensure that while regulating the right to assemble, the rights of other citizens would not be interfered with nor disturbed.
“The right guaranteed under Article 16 is not absolute but it has been expressly made subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of public order,” maintained the IHC Chief Justice.
He further said that the principles of democracy are embedded in our Constitution, which, inter alia, include rule of law and political tolerance. “In a democracy governed under the Constitution, no one is above the law, not even the holder of the highest public office. It is the duty of every citizen, particularly political leaders and public office holders to obey the law and if it is violated, than to be held accountable,” said Justice Athar.
He continued, “It is indeed an extra ordinary situation because the political party in power as well as those in opposition have announced show of their street power. It is, therefore, an onerous constitutional obligation of the executive authorities to strike a balance between the guaranteed fundamental rights, regardless of whether the applicant is from the ruling political party or represents those who sit on the opposition benches.
The IHC CJ stated that the concern of the petitioner rose in the petition regarding existence of an imminent and grave risk of harm does not appear to be misplaced. The maintenance of public order and imposition of reasonable restriction in the context of the right guaranteed under Article 16 of the Constitution is within the exclusive domain of the executive authorities i.e. the Minister for Interior, Secretary, Ministry of Interior, Chief Commissioner, Inspector General of Police and Deputy Commissioner, Islamabad Capital Territory.
The court, therefore, directed the aforementioned officials to ensure that while considering applications received from the political parties, they will be mindful of their constitutional duty to safeguard the fundamental rights of all the citizens.
It further said that they obviously are equipped and competent to undertake an exercise to assess the likely risks and thereafter take such decisions as would be necessary for safeguarding the rights of the citizens.
The bench said that however, they shall be jointly and severally accountable for any harm suffered by the citizens or damage caused to property pursuant to their decisions. Likewise, the applicants, whether representing the ruling party or the opposition parties, are expected to strictly comply with the regulations and restrictions prescribed in the interest of maintaining public order by the aforementioned officials.