Petitioner says Imran Khan, other PTI leaders, made derogatory statements against judiciary, ECP, Armed Forces.
ISLAMABAD - The Supreme Court of Pakistan Thursday directed the petitioner to submit transcripts and relevant material to prove that Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leaders gave statements against state institutions.
A two-member bench of the court comprising Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Justice Yahya Afridi heard the case filed by Advocate Qosain Faisal. The petitioner had sought the court’s directions to stop the PTI’s leaders, including Imran Khan, from giving statements against the institutions. He also pleaded with the court to establish a commission to take further action against the PTI leaders.
During the course of proceedings, Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan asked the advocate Hassan Raza Pasha counsel for the petitioner to inform that which of the fundamental rights were violated. He asked which law was violated by PTI leaders. He also questioned why the petitioner did not approach relevant forum to get his grievances redressed. He also asked how the case was a matter of public importance.
Could the court intervene in a matter under Article 184/3 out of public interest against private persons, the judge asked. Justice Ijaz further asked why the court should hear this case.
Advocate Faisal said that PTI chief Imran Khan and other leaders made derogatory statements against the higher judiciary, the Election Commission and the Armed Forces. Upon this, Justice Yahya Afridi said that the lawyers’ argument remained unclear. He asked had the courts been rendered weak following someone’s comments. He said that the apex court had the authority to evoke Article 204 in contempt of court. Whenever the court deemed it appropriate, it would take notice, he added.
Addressing the counsel, Justice Yahya Afridi maintained that his (petitioner) job was to inform the court and he had done so. He asked the counsel that it was appropriate for him to approach another forum for the proceedings. The counsel said that the petitioner was a Pakistani citizen and his sentiments were hurt by the statements made against the institutions.
Upon this, Justice Ijaz asked would the court now take action if someone’s feelings were hurt. Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan said that the statements might had been reported on the media. Only a few were reporting correctly these days, he added.
He said that the court must be made aware of why it should intervene in such cases. Subsequently, the counsel sought time to submit reply. Later, hearing of the case was adjourned until the first week of September.
ISLAMABAD - The Supreme Court of Pakistan Thursday directed the petitioner to submit transcripts and relevant material to prove that Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leaders gave statements against state institutions.
A two-member bench of the court comprising Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Justice Yahya Afridi heard the case filed by Advocate Qosain Faisal. The petitioner had sought the court’s directions to stop the PTI’s leaders, including Imran Khan, from giving statements against the institutions. He also pleaded with the court to establish a commission to take further action against the PTI leaders.
During the course of proceedings, Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan asked the advocate Hassan Raza Pasha counsel for the petitioner to inform that which of the fundamental rights were violated. He asked which law was violated by PTI leaders. He also questioned why the petitioner did not approach relevant forum to get his grievances redressed. He also asked how the case was a matter of public importance.
Could the court intervene in a matter under Article 184/3 out of public interest against private persons, the judge asked. Justice Ijaz further asked why the court should hear this case.
Advocate Faisal said that PTI chief Imran Khan and other leaders made derogatory statements against the higher judiciary, the Election Commission and the Armed Forces. Upon this, Justice Yahya Afridi said that the lawyers’ argument remained unclear. He asked had the courts been rendered weak following someone’s comments. He said that the apex court had the authority to evoke Article 204 in contempt of court. Whenever the court deemed it appropriate, it would take notice, he added.
Addressing the counsel, Justice Yahya Afridi maintained that his (petitioner) job was to inform the court and he had done so. He asked the counsel that it was appropriate for him to approach another forum for the proceedings. The counsel said that the petitioner was a Pakistani citizen and his sentiments were hurt by the statements made against the institutions.
Upon this, Justice Ijaz asked would the court now take action if someone’s feelings were hurt. Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan said that the statements might had been reported on the media. Only a few were reporting correctly these days, he added.
He said that the court must be made aware of why it should intervene in such cases. Subsequently, the counsel sought time to submit reply. Later, hearing of the case was adjourned until the first week of September.
