Recently Joined Advocates
Browse the latest legal professionals who have verified their profiles on our platform.
Connect directly with verified advocates, access pro bono services, and get the legal representation you deserve without hidden fees.
Browse the latest legal professionals who have verified their profiles on our platform.
Stay informed with recent updates, legal insights, and news from across Pakistan.
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday took up appeals filed by human rights lawyer Imaan Mazari and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, against an anti-terrorism court (ATC) order rejecting their petitions challenging the framing of charges and the inclusion of terrorism-related provisions in the security breach case. A division bench comprising Justice Inaam Ameen Minhas and Justice Shahrukh Arjumand heard the matter, with Riasat Ali Azad, Zainab Janjua and other lawyers appearing before the court. At the outset, Justice Minhas asked whether the accused had received copies of the relevant documents. Counsel Riasat Ali Azad replied in the negative and said he wanted to examine how the charges had been framed. The counsel argued that the ATC had passed the impugned order without the requisite authority to do so. He said the case had remained pending before the court of Judge Abual Hasanat Mohammad Zulqarnain from March 12, 2025, until recently. Citing the precedent in the Zulfikar Ali Bhutto case, Azad argued that the court in which the challan was submitted was the one authorised to hear the case. He further contended that the accused had not been provided with copies of the relevant documents and that the charges had not been read out in their presence, as they were not physically present in the courtroom at the time. âLegal proceedings cannot move forward in the absence of the accused,â the counsel argued, adding that the charge must be framed in the presence of the accused. He also alleged a violation of a decision of the National Judicial Policy Making Committee. Describing the charge as the foundation of a trial, Azad maintained that any defect in its framing would undermine the legality of the subsequent proceedings. Justice Minhas asked whether the trial was being conducted through a video link. The counsel replied that the proceedings had initially taken place through a video link but had shifted to a jail trial at the most recent hearing. The judge also inquired whose signatures appeared on the charge document. Azad said the document bore his signature, but lacked those of the accused, which, according to him, were legally required. Justice Minhas questioned whether the proceedings could not be conducted through a video link, observing that the accused had been connected through the facility and that their attendance had been recorded when the charges were framed. The counsel, however, insisted that the accused were not present when he signed the documents and requested the court to summon the video recording of the proceedings. He also said the copies had not been delivered to the accused in jail and that an affidavit had been submitted to this effect. Justice Minhas remarked that it appeared the defence had not intended to accept the copies. Azad responded that every application filed by the defence before the ATC had been rejected. He said the defence had requested both the case record and the video recording of the proceedings. The judge subsequently asked where it was stipulated that the accused must be physically produced for the framing of charges. Azad reiterated that the appeals also challenged the inclusion of anti-terrorism provisions in the case and repeatedly urged the high court to halt the trial. âWe shall see; we will let you know,â Justice Minhas remarked. At this point, Janjua informed the court that the jail trial was scheduled to take place at 2:30pm on Monday. Justice Minhas said the court would issue an order and inform the parties accordingly. He concluded that notices had been issued and the court would decide how to proceed once the responses were received. Imaan and Hadi were indicted in the case on Oct 7, and both accused were produced via video link. Hadi objected to the framing of charges, stating that he had not yet been provided copies of the case documents. He argued that charges could not be framed before completion of all legal formalities. Advocate Janjua also opposed the indictment, submitting that neither of them had been provided copies of the case record. She further contended that both the accused had not been allowed to meet their lawyers, and therefore, the requirements for framing charges had not been fulfilled. The case pertains to the alleged disruption of the security route of an international cricket team and incitement to public unrest. Imaan and Hadiâs rearrest The lawyer couple has been in jail since their arrest on Jan 23 in a case registered against them for protesting outside the Islamabad High Court (IHC) and allegedly manhandling the IHC Bar Association (IHCBA) president. The arrest prompted criticism by rights bodies, politicians and journalists, who stressed the coupleâs right to a fair trial. Just a day later, a sessions court sentenced them to 17 years on multiple charges under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca) in a case pertaining to controversial social media posts. The convictions were widely condemned by lawyers and United Nations (UN) experts. On Sept 17, following months of litigation before the courts, the Supreme Court suspended their sentences in the case. The SC ordered their release pending the Islamabad High Courtâs final verdict on their appeals against the trial courtâs decision. However, the reprieve was short-lived as hours later, Islamabad police arrested the couple again in connection with another case and produced them before an ATC, which sent them to jail on judicial remand. The fresh case in which the two were arrested was registered at the federal capitalâs Kohsar police station on March 22 last year on the complaint of City Magistrate Ghulam Murtaza Chandio. Imaan and her husband were accused of chanting anti-government slogans and blocking roads and were nominated by name in the FIR. However, at the time of registration of the case, no section of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) had been added. The FIR included sections 188 (disobedience of an order lawfully promulgated by a public servant), 341 (wrongful restraint), 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation), 353 (assault or use of criminal force to deter a public servant from discharging their official duty) and 186 (obstructing a public servant in the performance of official duties). Source (Dawn News): Read full article
Read Full ArticlePESHAWAR: The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Bar Council (KPBC) on Saturday declared the imposition of governorâs rule and emergency in the province unconstitutional and undemocratic, and announced a province-wide strike on Oct 19 (Monday). The council also announced it would file a constitutional petition in the Peshawar High Court against the âillegalâ move. The council demanded that the dysfunctional Chief Minister Sohail Afridi and the Provincial Assembly Speaker Babar Saleem Swati be produced before the court concerned or released. It also condemned the alleged illegal detention of a senior lawyer and leader of Insaf Lawyers Forum, Ameer Ijaz, and demanded his immediate release. The council decided to convene a meeting of the presidents of all district and tehsil bar associations of the province on Oct 24 to decide future course of action against the imposition of emergency. KPBC Vice-Chairman Asfandyar Khan and its Executive Committee Chairman Malik Imad Azam made the announcements during a press conference after a general body meeting on Saturday. Mr Khan said the council constituted a lawyersâ panel to file a constitutional petition in the High Court against the imposition of emergency in the province, so that the court could hear it, along with other petitions on the matter, on Oct 20. He said the meeting condemned the imposition of the governorâs rule and emergency in the province as an âillegalâ step. He said the legal fraternity would observe a strike across the province on Oct 19 and would avoid appearing in cases. The KPBC vice-chairman said that if the chief minister and the provincial assembly speaker had committed any crime, they should be produced in court; otherwise they should be released. Mr Khan said a committee had been formed to prevent lawyersâ harassment, adding that the body would take up the issue with the governor and the police chief. He asked the law enforcement agencies, including the police, to avoid conducting âillegalâ raids at the residences of lawyers in the aftermath of the emergency in the province. The council expressed concern over the âillegal detentionâ of Ameer Ijaz Advocate and asked the LEAs to set him free. Unidentified persons in Mardan allegedly kidnapped the lawyer around a month ago. Since then, his whereabouts are unknown, and his colleagues suspect he may have been taken away by LEAs. On this occasion, Mr Azam declared the imposition of emergency and the governorâs rule unconstitutional and undemocratic. He said representatives of all lawyersâ organisations attended the bar councilâs meeting. The KPBC Executive Committee chairman asked the federal government to avoid adventurism in the province. Published in Dawn, October 18th, 2026 Source (Dawn News): Read full article
Read Full ArticleDERA ISMAIL KHAN: The authorities here on Saturday locked and sealed the historic Ram Leela Temple in Rahim Bazaar days after civil society activists intervened to stop the demolition of the heritage building for the construction of a commercial plaza at the site. The building had earlier been sealed by Assistant Commissioner Hamid Siddiq following public protests and work at the site was stopped, said local sources. The latest development came as civil society representatives and members of the Hindu community held a joint meeting to discuss the reported move to demolish the temple. The participants condemned the proposed construction and called on elected representatives to raise the issue in the National Assembly. The meeting, held at the office of civil society president Sohail Ahmed Azmi, was attended by former MPA and Hindu community representative Kishore Kumar, social worker Muhammad Nauman and others. The participants said the Ram Leela Temple was among around 400 buildings in Dera Ismail Khan identified as cultural heritage properties by the Evacuee Trust Property Board. They expressed concern over any move to demolish the temple and said civil society, the business community, writers and heritage advocates would resist any action that could damage the cityâs historical heritage. The participants also alleged that the relevant authorities had allowed construction of a commercial plaza at the site despite questions over their legal authority to do so. They called for an inquiry into the matter and said complaints would be submitted to the district administration, the NA speaker, the archaeology department and other relevant authorities. Published in Dawn, October 18th, 2026 Source (Dawn News): Read full article
Read Full Articleâą Demands authorities disclose whereabouts of Sohail Afridiâą Mengal says those claiming to be framers of Constitution are âtrampling itââą TTAP alliance challenges governorâs rule, emergency before Peshawar High Court PESHAWAR: PTI fouÂnder Imran Khan is being forced into an agreement, similar to those given to former prime ministers Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto, Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Mahmood Khan Achakzai claimed on Friday. The opposition leader was referring to the arrangements whereby the two former PMs went into self-imposed exile following their respective ousters. Mr Sharif, who was ousted and imprisoned following a military coup by then-army chief Pervez Musharraf, left the country in 2000 following a deal negotiated by Saudi and Lebanese leaders. Benazir, meanwhile, voluntarily went into self-exile after her party lost the 1997 general elections following her dismissal by then-president Farooq LegÂhari. At the time, her husband Asif Zardari was imprisoned over corruption charges, and was finally released in 2004. âThe same is happening today with the PML-N and PPP in government,â Mr Achakzai said at a news conference at the Peshawar High Court (PHC). He was accompanied by Tehreek-i-Tahafuz-Ayin-i-Pakistan (TTAP) leaders Sardar Akhtar Mengal and Allama Raja Nasir Abbas. He said they were in contact with all opposition parties and would soon convene a multi-party conference. Resigning from the assemblies was also an option, he said, adding that they had submitted their demands in response to the offer of negotiations. âNowhere in the world is a prisoner denied meetings,â he said, calling for the withdrawal of the âwrong amenÂdmentâ, empowÂerment of parliament and the formation of an independent commission to ensure transparent elections. He said no problem could be resolved until parliament was empowered. Expressing concern over the whereabouts of the KP chief minister and other lawmakers, he demanded that the authorities disclose the chief ministerâs whereabouts, calling it their constitutional right to know. âWe stand with the people of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The people of this province have the first right over its minerals. Regardless of political affiliation, everyone must unite for the homeland,â he said, adding that they would be safer if the country survived. Mr Mengal said those claiming to be the framers of the Constitution were trampling on it. He questioned the imposition of governorâs rule in KP on the grounds of terrorism, asking whether military operations had improved or worsened conditions in Balochistan. He said KPâs elected chief minister had been removed, while the provincial assembly speaker and a minister were missing. Those who had won the general elections on Form 47 had become members of the National Assembly, he alleged, adding that the system could not continue this way. Raja Nasir Abbas, the opposition leader in the Senate, said lawlessness had reached its peak. âYou cannot run a country, yet you have occupied a province,â he told reporters, adding that a cabinet member had himself acknowledged that the system had collapsed. TTAP challenges governorâs rule Meanwhile on Friday, TTAP leaders challenged the proclamation of emergency and imposition of governorâs rule in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa before the PHC, seeking to have the measures declared unconstitutional and illegal. The constitutional petition was jointly filed by TTAP Chairman Mehmood Khan Achakzai, Vice Chairman Senator Raja Nasir Abbas, Balochistan National Party-Mengal chief Sardar Akhtar Mengal and Sindh Taraqi Pasand Party leader Syed Zainul Abideen through Advocates Muazzam Butt and Baseem Ahmad Siddiqui. The court was requested to declare the Oct 11 proclamation of emergency, issued under Articles 232(1) and 234 of the Constitution, unconstitutional and without lawful authority, arguing that the required constitutional conditions had not been met or that the measures exceeded the powers conferred by the Constitution. They challenged the purported transfer of the KP Assemblyâs legislative powers to parliament and the displacement of the elected chief minister and provincial cabinet. They also sought the annulment of executive orders and notifications that depended on the validity of the proclamation. The petitioners also challenged the establishment of the purported KP Advisory Council and Area Development Secretariat, arguing that these bodies could not exercise powers beyond those conferred by the Constitution or replace established provincial institutions. They questioned any purported suspension of constitutional provisions, including Article 175(3), unless expressly authorised by the Constitution. The petitioners sought annulment of the Oct 11 notification concerning the deployment of armed forces in the province to the extent where it violated Article 245, failed to meet constitutional requirements or exceeded the scope of the provision. They also sought directions to ensure that elected representatives and constitutionally established institutions in KP were not unlawfully prevented from performing their functions and that no elected representative was detained or restrained except in accordance with the Constitution. Pending a final decision, they sought interim relief to suspend or restrain the impugned measures to prevent the displacement of elected institutions, transfer of legislative authority, creation of parallel executive structures or other irreparable harm, subject to the courtâs assessment of constitutional requirements and public safety. Published in Dawn, October 17th, 2026 Source (Dawn News): Read full article
Read Full ArticleLAHORE: The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) on Thursday concluded that religious minorities continue to face violations of their fundamental rights â including through the misuse of blasphemy laws, forced marriages and conversions, hate speech and discriminatory practices â despite recent legislative measures aimed at protecting them. In its seventh annual report on freedom of religion, titled âSanctuary Denied: Freedom of Religion or Belief in 2025/26â, and an accompanying press release, the HRCP highlighted that scores of individuals accused of blasphemy remained in legal limbo, while alleged perpetrators of an âorganised entrapment networkâ had yet to be investigated. The report documented attacks on the Ahmadi community, including two attacks in Chenab Nagar in October 2025 and June 2026, and pointed out âincreasingly overt attempts to exclude Ahmadisâ from public and commercial life. Girls belonging to Christian and Hindu communities continued to face abductions and forced marriages, compounded by poverty and inadequate police responses, the report said. Discriminatory employment practices, controversial changes to school curricula and the marginalisation of minority concerns in mainstream media further undermined the principle of equal citizenship, it added. At the reportâs launch, HRCP Director Farah Zia warned that the stateâs approach to religious minorities was becoming increasingly exclusionary, according to the press release issued by the commission. Minority rights defender Nabila Feroz Bhatti highlighted the case of Kamran Gill, a Christian medical practitioner from Sheikhupura, whose dispensary was set ablaze by a mob on Oct 9 following allegations that he had shared blasphemous content on social media. HRCP Vice-Chair in Punjab Raja Ashraf said blasphemy accusations had become a âmeans of exploiting and endangering vulnerable peopleâ. Arafat Mazhar, director of research and advocacy collective Shehri Pakistan, urged the public to consult lawyers representing people accused in blasphemy cases and allow courts to determine the appropriate legal procedures, rather than turning accused individuals into symbols of the broader debate over blasphemy laws. Former HRCP chairperson Hina Jilani highlighted the institutional nature of discrimination against minorities, saying: âDemocracy should have no concept of âminorityâ and âmajorityâ.â On a positive note, the HRCP welcomed the passage of the National Commission for Minorities Act 2025, as well as laws in Punjab and Balochistan that raised the minimum marriageable age to 18. However, it noted that this minorities commission had yet to be constituted months after the lawâs passage, raising questions about the governmentâs commitment to implementing the legislation. Recommendations In its recommendations, the HRCP called on the federal government to implement the National Commission for Minorities Act without further delay by constituting the commission, framing its rules and appointing its chairperson and members in accordance with the law. It urged federal and provincial governments to publish annual, disaggregated data on blasphemy cases, mob violence, forced conversion complaints and prison conditions to improve transparency and enable independent scrutiny of official claims. The HRCP also called on the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government to enact legislation setting the minimum marriageable age at 18 for both men and women, bringing the province in line with the laws recently adopted in Punjab and Balochistan. It recommended prompt legal action against individuals and groups inciting violence, mandatory training for police and investigative agencies, including the Federal Investigation Agency, on freedom of religion or belief, and stronger safeguards for human rights defenders, lawyers and journalists working on minority rights. The report called for an end to discriminatory recruitment practices that confine many religious minorities to sanitation work, and urged an overhaul of the Evacuee Trust Property Board â a government department that administers evacuee properties â to make it more transparent, accountable and representative of minority communities. It further called for regular monitoring of seminaries linked to forced conversions and underage marriages, and recommended that religious conversions âtake place in court or in the presence of a government officialâ. Emphasising the need to curb hate speech, the HRCP urged authorities to take legal action against incitement to violence, particularly on social media, while respecting the freedom of speech guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution. It called for improvements in police intelligence gathering, crowd control and community policing to prevent mob violence, as well as effective departmental accountability mechanisms to address corruption within law enforcement agencies. The report recommended reviewing school curricula to promote inclusivity and pluralism, operationalising provincial research centres envisaged under countering violent extremism laws and keeping interfaith committees active throughout the year. It also urged authorities to prevent pressure from bar associations and religious groups from influencing police and district administrations to act against particular sects or minority communities. The HRCP called for the full implementation of the Supreme Courtâs 2014 judgment on religious freedoms, protection of minority places of worship and the reopening of closed places of worship. Given the severity of blasphemy charges, it recommended that investigations under Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code be conducted by senior-ranking officials. It also called for public awareness campaigns explaining sensitive laws carrying capital punishment, the methods used in alleged entrapment schemes in the digital age and developments in cyber laws. The report stressed that mainstream media should be able to represent all segments of society, particularly marginalised groups and stated that no place of worship should be demolished without a clear court order issued after hearing both sides. It added that those attempting to vandalise places of worship should face legal prosecution. Source (Dawn News): Read full article
Read Full ArticleRAWALPINDI: Rights activist and lawyer Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, on Friday objected to the manner of their presentation during the hearing of the security breach case, with the couple and their lawyers eventually walking out of the proceedings at Adiala jail. The defence counsel also filed an application seeking an end to the jail trial. The case pertains to the alleged disruption of a security route of an international cricket team and incitement to public unrest. Imaan and her husband have been accused of removing barriers from the route. The couple was indicted in the case on Oct 7. A day earlier, at the policeâs recommendation, citing limitations in transporting the accused to court, the court directed counsels and witnesses to appear at the Adiala jail for the next hearing. On Friday, Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) Judge Tahir Abbas Sipra conducted the hearing inside Adiala jail, where proceedings commenced at 10:55am, according to the defence counsel present inside the makeshift courtroom. The accused were presented inside a dock located in a corner of the courtroom, prompting them to raise objections over the manner in which they were produced before the court. âThis is not the proper way to present someone in court,â Imaan said, adding that they were not being allowed to meet their lawyers. Hadi complained that the two were being treated worse than terrorists. Judge Sipra, taking note of the police standing next to the accused, directed the personnel to move away and remarked: âThey have been brought into the courtroom; what is the need for the police to stand right next to them?â The defence counsel had also filed an application seeking an end to the jail trial and adjournment of the hearing on Friday. After hearing arguments from the lawyers, the court announced a 20-minute recess. On the application filed by the defence, he said, âI have received your applications; I will issue an order regarding this.â After the proceedings resumed, prosecution witness Ibrahim recorded his statement, while defence lawyer Aimal Khan Mandokhail urged the court to decide the application seeking adjournment before proceeding further. âWe have filed an application to adjourn the hearing; please rule on it,â he told the court. He also complained that other members of the defence legal team were not being allowed to enter the courtroom. âIf the proceedings continue in this manner, we cannot remain a part of them,â Mandokhail said. He further urged the court to not defer the matter until the following day, referring to the pending bail proceedings. Subsequently, Imaan, Hadi and their lawyers walked out of the courtroom. Imaan and Hadiâs rearrest The lawyer couple has been in jail since their arrest on Jan 23 in a case registered against them for protesting outside the Islamabad High Court and allegedly manhandling the IHC Bar Association president. The arrest prompted criticism by rights bodies, politicians and journalists, who stressed the coupleâs right to a fair trial. Just a day later, a sessions court sentenced them to 17 years on multiple charges under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca) in a case pertaining to controversial social media posts. The convictions were widely condemned by lawyers and United Nations (UN) experts. On Sept 17, following months of litigation before the courts, the Supreme Court suspended their sentences in the case. The SC ordered their release pending the Islamabad High Courtâs final verdict on their appeals against the trial courtâs decision. However, the reprieve was short-lived as hours later, Islamabad police arrested the couple again in connection with another case and produced them before an ATC, which sent them to jail on judicial remand. The fresh case in which the two were arrested was registered at the federal capitalâs Kohsar police station on March 22 last year on the complaint of City Magistrate Ghulam Murtaza Chandio. Imaan and Hadi were accused of chanting anti-government slogans and blocking roads and were nominated by name in the FIR. However, at the time of registration of the case, no section of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) had been added. The FIR included sections 188 (disobedience of an order lawfully promulgated by a public servant), 341 (wrongful restraint), 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation), 353 (assault or use of criminal force to deter a public servant from discharging their official duty) and 186 (obstructing a public servant in the performance of official duties). Source (Dawn News): Read full article
Read Full ArticlePESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court on Friday fixed October 20 for the preliminary hearing of a petition filed by PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan challenging the imposition of emergency and governorâs rule in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and seeking to have the move declared unconstitutional. The federal government on October 11 imposed emergency in KP, and placed the province under governorâs rule, taking note of the âprovincial governmentâs deliberate disengagement from the fight against terrorismâ. The move followed weeks of political tensions between the Centre and the PTI â as well as negotiations to bridge their differences â after the latter announced a long march to Islamabad to demand the release of its jailed founder, Imran Khan. The opposition had criticised the move, vowing to raise its voice at every forum, including the judiciary. The instant petition was filed on October 14 by the PTI chairman. He will be represented by a panel of lawyers, including Barrister Sameer Khosa, Salman Akram Raja, Ali Zaman, Sardar Haseeb Ahmad and Zainab Shahid. The members of the bench that will hear the petition will be announced later. In his petition, Gohar urged the PHC to declare the federal governmentâs decision to impose emergency and governorâs rule in KP âunconstitutional, ultra vires, coram non judice, tainted with malice in law and fact, devoid of objective material, and of no legal effectâ and to set aside the proclamation. Filed under Article 199 of the Constitution, the petition named the federation of Pakistan (through the secretaries of the Cabinet Division, law, interior, and defence ministries); the province of KP; KP Governor Faisal Karim Kundi; the KP Assembly speaker; and the secretary of the KP Home and Tribal Affairs Department as respondents. Sohail Afridi, who is no longer functioning as the provinceâs chief minister following the imposition of governorâs rule, was also named as a pro forma respondent. Gohar challenged the âconstitutionality, legality and viresâ of the October 11 decision, the order deploying army troops to the province, and âall consequential and derivative executive orders, notifications, and bodiesâ constituted as a result. These included the establishment of the KP Advisory Council and the âarbitraryâ detention and removal of Afridi as the lawful chief minister of KP, along with his provincial cabinet, which had been vested with full executive powers under Article 130 of the Constitution. Following the imposition of emergency and governorâs rule in the province, the federal government formed an 11-member technocratic KP Advisory Council. The council will assist Governor Kundi, who is now in charge of running the province, in exercising the functions of the KP government on behalf of the federal government. The PHC was further requested to declare that Paragraph 2 of the proclamation â which transferred the legislative powers of the KP Assembly to Parliament in the absence of a prior resolution passed by the assembly, as required under Article 232(1) â was âvoid ab initio and an unconstitutional usurpation of provincial autonomyâ. The petition also urged the PHC to restrain the federation from âtabling, entertaining, or enacting any provincial legislative business concerning Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in Parliamentâ. The petitioner asked the court to declare the proclamation illegal and unconstitutional and to set aside, dissolve or permanently restrain all executive orders, notifications, actions and bodies created âpursuant to or under the colour ofâ the proclamation. These included the constitution of the 11-member KP Advisory Council, headed by Governor Kundi; the establishment of the Area Development Secretariat (ADS) across 12 districts of the province; and the removal of the KP advocate general and the purported appointment of a replacement. The ADS was established to ârestore law and order, safeguard the security of the citizens of Pakistan and ensure good governance and developmentâ in Dera Ismail Khan, Tank, Lakki Marwat, Bannu, Bajaur, Mohmand, Khyber, Kurram, Orakzai, North Waziristan, South Waziristan (Upper) and South Waziristan (Lower). The petitioner also challenged the October 11 order deploying army troops under Article 245, asking the court to declare it unconstitutional on the grounds that it could not âsupplant or bypass the civilian executive and constitutional administrationâ of the province and could not be invoked in the absence of a lawful requisition by the provincial government headed by Afridi. Gohar sought directives requiring the respondents, including the federal government and the KP governor, to immediately disclose, produce and place before the PHC âthe entire record and so-called âobjective materialââ, including Governor Kundiâs report and the federal cabinetâs summary, on which the emergency proclamation and subsequent orders were allegedly based. He also sought directives for the immediate release of Afridi and members of the KP cabinet and assembly from âunlawful executive or preventive detentionâ. The petition further urged the court to direct the respondents to immediately produce Afridi before the PHC and restrain the state from placing him or any cabinet members in preventive detention or transferring them outside the courtâs jurisdiction. The petition claimed that, by unilaterally bypassing the elected provincial assembly over an alleged question of internal disturbance, the impugned proclamation violated âthe federal structure guaranteed under Article 1, the principles of democracy and provincial autonomy enshrined in the Objectives Resolution (Article 2A), and the legislative domain of the province recognised by Article 142 of the Constitutionâ. On these grounds, the proclamation was âultra vires the proviso to Article 232(1) read with Article 1, 2A, and 142 of the Constitutionâ and liable to be set aside, it added. Gohar further contended that the proclamation made no mention of any âgrave emergencyâ arising from a war or other external aggression, as required by the text of Article 232(1) â nor would such an assertion be supported by facts. He maintained that neither the country nor KP faced a grave emergency from any ongoing war or external aggression, nor was there any known risk or threat of such. The petition further contended that the reliance on âinternal disturbancesâ in the province needed to be assessed against a demonstrable and objective criterion, which was âentirely absentâ from the impugned proclamation. âDespite an unfortunately high number of incidents of terrorist violence in Balochistan, no state of emergency has been declared or even contemplated,â the petition stated. âThis clearly demonstrates that the terrorism and security pretext in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is nothing but a colourable device, deployed in sheer violation of Article 25.â The petition alleged that this pretext had been used solely because the KP government was formed by the opposition and its demands regarding PTI founder Imran Khan were unacceptable to the federal government. It added that the federal governmentâs claim was also belied by the fact that even at the height of terrorism between 2007 and 2015, âno emergency was ever imposed anywhere inside Pakistanâ. Gohar also argued that the invocation of Article 234 was âwithout lawful authority, tainted with malice in law, and devoid of jurisdictional basisâ. NDM petition Another petition challenging the imposition of emergency, filed by National Democratic Movement (NDM) central and provincial presidents Mohsin Dawar and Bushra Gohar, respectively, has also been fixed for hearing on October 20. The joint petition stated that the proclamation of emergency and governorâs rule was âpurely and patently against the mandate of people of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, hence, liable to be set at naughtâ. The petitioners prayed that the court declare the proclamation issued by the president of Pakistan on October 11, 2026, to be without legal effect and jurisdiction. They also requested the court to set aside the directions, appointments and actions taken, as well as omissions made, pursuant to the proclamation, to ensure constitutional conformity. They further sought interim relief, asking the court to suspend the operation of the impugned presidential proclamation until the final disposal of the writ petition. The petitioners stated that the president of Pakistan was under a solemn constitutional duty, under Article 42 of the Constitution read with the Third Schedule, to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and not allow personal interests to influence official conduct or decisions. They claimed that the KP governor, acting with mala fide intent and without jurisdiction, submitted a tailor-made report to the president of Pakistan. They alleged that, without taking into account the constitutional guidelines explicitly set out in Articles 232 and 234 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, the respondents issued the impugned proclamation on October 11, 2026. The petitioners contended that the KP government and its executive had never reported the respondent emergency call/whistle blow regarding the security concern, which was beyond the control of the government; hence, the action and issuance of the proclamation solely and exclusively by the president was against the norms and contours of democracy and provincial autonomy. They added that the issuance of the proclamation was the outcome of mala fide, and patently without jurisdiction and had no constitutional backing. They further contended that Article 232 of the Constitution had delineated a specific procedure and limitations for declaring and proclamation of emergency in the province, which had not been followed by the respondents; hence, the action and orders of âProclamation of Emergencyâ in the province of KP were unconstitutional and unlawful. Source (Dawn News): Read full article
Read Full ArticleISLAMABAD: The Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) on Tuesday extended the term of the Constitutional Benches of the Sindh High Court (SHC) by one year. It was the first meeting of the JCP attended by PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari and Senator Rana Sanaullah Khan, who were recently nominated by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and his deputy Ishaq Dar, respectively, under Article 175A(2)(vii) of the Constitution. Both will represent parliament as members of the treasury benches of their respective Houses. The nominations became necessary following the recent resignations of PPP stalwart Senator Farooq H. Naek and PML-N member Aftab Sheikh from the commission. Presided over by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi, the JCP welcomed Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari and Rana Sanaullah to the meeting. President approves foreign visits by chief justices of SC and FCC During the proceedings, the commÂission declared the law degree of MuhÂammad Ahsan Bhoon, one of its members representing the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC), the regulatory body for lawyers, to be valid and genuine. The CJP informed the commission that, upon receiving a complaint from former member of the National Assembly and husband of Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz, Capt (retd) Muhammad Safdar, he had referred the matter to the PBC for verification. The council subsequently verified Mr Bhoonâs law degree twice, the CJP added. Mr Bhoon had been facing allegations concerning his educational credentials after Capt (retd) Safdar lodged a complaint with the JCP seeking verification of his academic qualifications, enrolment and professional credentials. Earlier, Mr Bhoon had served a defamation notice worth Rs5 billion on retired Capt Safdar, demanding an unconditional public apology and the retraction of the allegation that his LLB degree was fake. Foreign visits On the advice of PM Shehbaz Sharif, President Asif Ali Zardari has approved ex-Pakistan leaves and issued no-objection certificates (NOC) for the chief justices of the Supreme Court (SC) and the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) to make upcoming foreign visits. The Presidency said that President Zardari has approved the trips of CJP Yahya Afridi and FCC Chief Justice Aminuddin Khan. Published in Dawn, October 14th, 2026 Source (Dawn News): Read full article
Read Full Article