If Things Go Wrong, It’s Sheikh Rashid’s Fault: IHC

ISLAMABAD: If any mishap occurs before or during the no-confidence vote against Pakistan’s Prime Minister, the interior minister, Sheikh Rashid, and his subordinates would be held accountable, says the chief justice of Pakistan’s Islamabad High Court (IHC).

A resident of Islamabad, Asma Malik, contacted the IHC, claiming that political leaders’ appeals for public meetings at D-Chowk, in front of Parliament House, placed the safety of the residents living there in severe danger.

Many political officials, including those from the ruling party, have made remarks that might stoke violence, her legal team has said.

To back up her claim that leaders from both the government and opposition parties planned to promote lawlessness, the petitioner provided to the petition copies of social media posts posted by those officials to support her claim.

The decision In a show of support for its leader, Imran Khan, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Party (PTI) has scheduled a million-strong gathering outside Parliament House.

Before the vote on the no-confidence motion, the opposition coalition has also threatened to swarm D-Chowk with their supporters.

Supreme Court Justice Minallah described this as an “exceptional scenario” since both parties in power and opposition had declared a public display of their authority.

If the petitioner comes from either the ruling party or the political opposition, the administrative authorities have an onerous constitutional requirement to find a middle ground between established basic rights.

Justice Minallah noted that the executive authorities, including the interior minister, the interior secretary, and Islamabad’s chief commissioner, deputy commissioner, and inspector general of police, were solely responsible for maintaining public order and imposing reasonable restrictions under Article 16 of the Constitution (IGP).

“It is for this reason that the aforementioned officials should be cognizant of their constitutional obligation to protect the basic rights of all people while evaluating petitions from political parties. It’s clear that they can do a risk assessment and then make the required judgments to protect the rights of individuals,” he said.