Supreme Court Verdict in TLP's sit-in case - Khalid Zafar & Associates

Supreme Court verdict in TLP sit-in case

The Supreme Court verdict on TLP’s sit-in case brought to the fore a number of important matters. The Apex Court has examined the Constitution, determined what constitutes public importance, interpreted fundamental rights, considered the consequences of institutional overreach, the tactics used to achieve political agendas, how the State protects citizens and their fundamental rights, the security mechanisms in place, the m andate and role of the intelligence agencies, the independence and obligations of the media, the responsibilities of PEMRA, the role of the Election Commission and what Islam teaches.

The following declarations and directions were the crux of the judgement:

1. Subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by law, citizens have the right to form and to be members of political parties.
2. Every citizen and political party has the right to assemble and protest provided such assembly and protest is peaceful and complies with the law imposing reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order. The right to assemble and protest is circumscribed only to the extent that it infringes on the fundamental rights of others, including their right to free movement and to hold and enjoy property.
3. Protesters who obstruct people’s right to use roads and damage or destroy property must be proceeded against in accordance with the law and held accountable.
4. The Constitution earmarks the responsibilities of the Election Commission which it must fulfill. If a political party does not comply with the law governing political parties then the Election Commission must proceed against it in accordance with the law. The law is most certainly not cosmetic as contended on behalf of the Election Commission.
5. All political parties have to account for the source of their funds in accordance with the law.
6. The State must always act impartially and fairly. The law is applicable to all, including those who are in government and institutions must act independently of those in government.
7. When the State failed to prosecute those at the highest echelons of government who were responsible for the murder and attempted murder of peaceful citizens on the streets of Karachi on 12th May, 2007 it set a bad precedent and encouraged others to resort to violence to achieve their agendas.
8. A person issuing an edict or fatwa, which harms another or puts another in harm’s way, must be criminally prosecuted under the Pakistan Penal Code, the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and/or the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016.
9. Broadcasters who broadcast messages advocating or inciting the commission of an offence violate the PEMRA Ordinance and the terms of their licences and must be proceeded against by PEMRA in accordance with the law.
10. Cable operators who stopped or interrupted the broadcast of licenced broadcasters must be proceeded against by PEMRA in accordance with the PEMRA Ordinance, and if this was done on the behest of others then PEMRA should report those so directing the cable operators to the concerned authorities.
11. Those spreading messages through electronic means whichadvocate or incite the commission of an offence are liable to be prosecuted under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016.
12. All intelligence agencies (including ISI, IB and MI) and the ISPR must not exceed their respective m andates. They cannot curtail the freedom of speech and expression and donot have the authority to interfere with broadcasts and publications, in the management of broadcasters/publishers and in the distribution of newspapers.
13. Intelligence agencies should monitor activities of all those who threaten the territorial integrity of the country and all those who undermine the security of the people and the State by resorting to or inciting violence.
14. To best ensure transparency and the rule of law it would be appropriate to enact laws which clearly stipulate the respective m andates of the intelligence agencies.
15.  The Constitution emphatically prohibits members of the Armed Forces from engaging in any kind of political activity, which includes supporting a political party, faction or individual. The Government of Pakistan through the Ministry of Defence and the respective Chiefs of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force are directed to initiate action against the personnel under their comm and who are found to have violated their oath.
16. The police and other law enforcement agencies are directed to develop st andard plans and procedure with regard to how best to h andle rallies, protests and dharnas, and ensure that such plans/procedures are flexible enough to attend to different situations. It is clarified that though the making of such plans/procedures is not within the jurisdiction of this Court however we expect that in the maintenance of law and order every effort will be taken to avoid causing injury and loss of life.
17. Direction given to the Federal and provincial governments to monitor those advocating hate, extremism and terrorism and prosecute the perpetrators in accordance with the law.

DOWN LOAD PDF Version of full judgement