ISLAMABAD   -  A Supreme Court judge on Wednesday lambasted the top intelligence agency of the country for its arbitrariness, after it failed to produce a fresh report on last year’s Faizabad sit-in.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa, member of a two-judge bench headed by Justice Mushir Alam, asked if Pakistan had turned into a security state.

The court ordered the defence secretary and the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) to appear on the next hearing along with a comprehensive report –revealing the financial affairs of the protest parties and their leaders.

The same day, hearing a petition demanding to make the Faizabad sit-in inquiry report public, Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui of the Islamabad High Court strongly criticised the military, questioning its involvement in commercial activities.

In first week of November 2017, the life of the people of the twin cities of Islamabad and Rawalpindi was disrupted for weeks by a protest of the Tehreek-e-Labbaik Ya Rasullah (TLYR) and some other religious groups.

The leaders of the sit-in, especially Khadim Hussain Rizvi, resorted to repeatedly abusing the state functionaries for their alleged inaction over the issue of amendment to the clauses relating to finality of prophethood, in the oath of candidates for the assemblies.

After all the fuss and unruliness, the government and protesters reached an army-brokered agreement in which the former conceded to the latter’s demands. Army even gave cash handouts to returning protesters.

This trampling of the laws of the land and making a mockery of the state, by the agitators on the one hand and the government and the army on the other, made the apex court take suo motu notice of the whole episode.

On last hearing, the agencies had submitted a report about the sit-in that was rejected by the apex court for being insufficient and unsatisfactory.

The top court specifically asked the Inter Services Intelligence [ISI] regarding the source of funding of TLYR, source of income of its leaders and tax returns, if any, which according to the court the agency had failed to answer satisfactorily.

During yesterday’s hearing, Justice Isa asked Deputy Attorney General [DAG] Sohail Mehmood if the agencies had a fresh report to submit.

The law officer told the bench that no such report has been furnished because the court had not passed any orders in this regard.

This reply invited wrath of the judge, who said that a new report should have been submitted when the court had expressed its dissatisfaction over the previous report.

“Who is paying you? Who is paying the Inter-Services Intelligence? No one should consider themselves above the law,” Justice Isa said while addressing the deputy attorney general.

“The army did not establish this country and the state will not be ruled on the whims and wishes of anyone,” he declared.

Justice Isa observed that half of Pakistan has already been lost and sarcastically asked in how many parts it would be divided further.

“Read history to know how Pakistan was established. Quaid-i-Azam was not surrounded by a brigade but a leadership willing to create Pakistan,” he said.

“We don’t want to expose you [ISI] but you are exposing yourself. If this is what this agency is doing then I (Justice Isa) should not sleep at night,” he said.

“Let a comprehensive report be submitted which should attend to the queries that have been raised (by the court),” the bench ruled in its written order following the hearing.

According to the short order, Defence Ministry Director Col Falak Naz was not in a position to answer the queries raised by the court during the course of hearing.

Therefore, the court ordered the defence secretary to appear himself on next hearing, along with the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP).

At the start of the hearing when DAG Sohail Mehmood said that no directions were issued by the court for a fresh report, he was directed to read the previous court order.

“How you (government) are running the country?” Justice Isa questioned, and asked him where AGP Ashtar Ausaf was. The DAG responded that the AGP was abroad for a week.

Justice Isa asked whether Pakistan was created so that people could live in terror and whether some people in the country were above the law. He further asked as to who was paying his salary and that of the ISI employees.

The representatives of ISI and government present in the court remained silent, forcing the judge to say himself that the people of this country were paying their salaries.

“We all are servants of the people of Pakistan,” he said.

Justice Isa further said that when this court takes up this case for hearing, propaganda statements begin to flood the social media [implying that this was being done on purpose].

“Either we should say we don’t want an independent country or we have to fulfil our responsibilities,” the judge observed.

The bench observed that all the agencies of Pakistan know nothing about the financiers of TLYR. They [agencies are giving an impression as if they] don’t know if there are any bank accounts of this organisation or its leaders and what is their source of income and whether they pay taxes.

When the DAG said that according to [earlier submitted] report the followers contribute to raise funds for the Tehreek, the judge remarked, “Why should we not assume that some enemies of Pakistan are giving them money.”

Justice Isa further lamented that judges were being targeted but no one can touch those who are creating chaos and causing damage to public property.

“They abuse us day and night, who will arrest them,” Justice Isa asked, adding that judges were doing efforts for getting the people their fundamental rights.

They bring the name of Holy Prophet Muhammad PBUH on their tongues in the name of ‘love’ and at the same time use the very same tongues to abuse [others], the judge further observed. “They in fact are enemies of Islam and they want others to hate this religion,” he added.

Justice Alam asked the law officer if any audit of the funding, mentioned in previous report, was conducted. The DAG replied that the report was based on documents.

 

Court condemns Pemra inaction

During the course of proceedings, a reply filed by Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) regarding the action taken by it on complaints was placed on record.

It shows that merely advice has been issued and one channel, namely 92 News, has been censured for going beyond the area cordoned for the law enforcement agencies, the bench observed.

Justice Isa resentfully said that the channel which was censured might have been shaken after receiving such [a severe] ‘punishment’.

The bench noted with dismay that the lack of action by Pemra on the complaints against different channels where serious breach and violation of law has been raised.

“No action against any other channel is shown to have been taken and action taken against one channel seems to be merely cosmetic and not serious,” the bench observed.

Justice Isa observed that the state should stand with the oppressed and not the oppressor, lamenting that some channels are chosen by the Pemra for punishment while others are kept out of the regulatory process.

“I am not living in a country that my parents wanted me to live in,” the judge remarked.

During the course of the proceeding correspondents of Jang Newspaper and Dawn TV complained that in certain areas, at the behest of some forces, their channels are interrupted and not allowed to be aired, while their publications are also restricted in such areas.

Hafiz SA Rehman, counsel for Pemra, after inquiring from the Pemra officers confirmed that certain reports have been received on this count. The bench noted that apparently no action has been taken.

Justice Isa told DAG that the bench was showing mirror to them [the government] adding, “We will not fear, we are servant of people [who are] paid out of the public exchequer.”

When a correspondent [of Jang Group] informed the bench that circulation of his newspaper was also banned in cantonment areas, Justice Isa said he believes that in today’s world such things were happening only in Pakistan.

He questioned if the Constitution of Pakistan apply to cantonment areas also. “Nobody is talking about the elephant [ISI/army] in the room,” he said adding, “We [Pakistanis] are not scared of enemies but of people living within the country.”

The judge added that the policy of pick and choose shall not be allowed, adding that if Geo TV violates law then file the complaint or else put all the channels off-air so that there is a level-playing field.

“DAG [is directed] to ensure that fundamental rights of the people including the right of information (Article 19A of the Constitution) is strictly enforced and all newspapers and media channels are freely made available to the citizens of Pakistan,” the bench ruled.

About the appointment of Pemra chairman, the order said, “Let the report of the Search Committee which we are told has been delegated the task to choose an appropriate candidate be placed on record. Learned DAG [is ordered] to ensure that the order of the court calling for the appointment of the chairman is complied with; otherwise, action against those responsible may be taken.”

“Since the learned Attorney General is out of Pakistan [the] matter is being adjourned to a date immediately after ten days,” the court ruled.

 

 

Army’s commercial activities

In a related case at the Islamabad High Court, the military was strongly criticised for pursuing commercial interests.

Hearing a petition for making the Faizabad sit-in inquiry report public, Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui questioned army’s involvement in commercial activities.

The judge remarked: “No army in the world is involved in commercial activities but ours is selling even cement, meat and bread.”

He said that the court will issue a notice to defence secretary to know about the stance of the ministry over the issue.

“They want to earn as per a commercial model but want to be dealt with like an armed force,” said Justice Siddiqui, adding that people have been made mental, economic and moral slaves.

The court issued a notice to the deputy attorney general, seeking a reply on the issue.

The petitioner, through his counsel, contended that they had approached the registrar office for access to the report but the plea was denied.

Justice Siddiqui replied on a lighter note, saying that he was already facing six references against him and it seemed that the petitioner wanted him [judge] to face the seventh one.

“The report has been sealed as per a court order,” he told the lawyer.

The case was deferred for an indefinite period.

During earlier hearings, the court had lashed out over assigning military the role of “mediator” to end the TLYR sit-in.

Justice Siddiqui had pointed out that instead of following the orders of the prime minister, the army chief himself became a mediator.

“Who is the army to adopt a mediator’s role?” the judge asked at a previous hearing. “Where does the law assign this role to a major general?” he further questioned.

 

 

 

Judges rebuke spy agency over Faizabad sit-in

 

 

 

SYED SABEEHUL HUSSNAIN/

Monitoring Desk