ISLAMABAD: On Friday, the federal government was compelled to reverse a significant administrative change after the Supreme Court raised concerns about the transfer of control of the Islamabad Wildlife Management Board (IWMB) from the Climate Change Division to the Interior Ministry.
This reversal followed a Supreme Court hearing led by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, which addressed contempt petitions related to a prior order demanding the relocation of restaurants from Margalla Hills National Park, including the renowned Monal eatery. The court expressed disapproval over the IWMB’s transfer to the Interior Ministry, which is not involved in the conservation and protection of national parks.
During the hearing, Chief Justice Isa and the bench questioned Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan and Climate Change Secretary Eazaz A Dar on the appropriateness of assigning conservation responsibilities to the Interior Ministry. Secretary Dar indicated he was not consulted on the transfer and suggested it was an inappropriate move. AGP Awan admitted that retaining the IWMB within the Climate Change Division would be preferable.
The AGP noted that the prime minister might not have received adequate advice on the matter, requesting time before any contempt actions were pursued. Consequently, the court postponed contempt proceedings until August 15, expecting AGP Awan to brief Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif on the issue and the recent court order.
A notification issued on July 19, 2024, had transferred IWMB management to the Interior Ministry and removed Chairperson Raina Saeed Khan. However, following the hearing, the Cabinet Division issued a new notification reversing this decision, restoring IWMB oversight to the Climate Change and Environmental Coordination Division.
Petitioners, represented by Advocate Umar Ijaz Gillani, argued that the transfer violated the June 11 court order and facilitated further damage to Margalla Hills National Park. They criticized the transfer to the Interior Ministry, noting its lack of expertise in conservation. Allegations of nepotism were also raised, linking Cabinet Secretary Kamran Ali Afzal to Luqman Ali Afzal, the Monal owner.
The court questioned whether the necessary cabinet approvals were sought for the notification, which Kamran Ali Afzal claimed was not required under Rule 3(3) of the Rules of Business, 1973. The court expressed skepticism about this explanation and concerns over possible nepotism and conflicts of interest.
Petitioners also highlighted the potential threats posed by the ‘Pine City’ housing project advertised in the capital, arguing it could further harm the national park. The court has issued notices to the Capital Development Authority (CDA) to clarify the status of the Pine City project and other potential developments in the park.
Further proceedings are scheduled for August 15.
