Faizabad sit-in government fact-finding committee rejected by SC. There has been a report by Pakistan’s Supreme Court that stated that the Attorney General, Mansoor Usman Awan, was ordered to form a new inquiry commission following the Supreme Court rejecting the government’s fact-finding committee that was appointed to investigate the 2017 Faizabad sit-in. This report is based on a report by Pakistan’s Supreme Court.
In response to the sit-in that was held in 2017 in October, a fact-finding committee was formed on October 27 to investigate the “role and instructions” of all “concerned” officials in handling and managing the sit-in as part of the response by the government.
The Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa said during today’s hearing that the apex court wanted to find out who was behind the Faizabad sit-in that took place earlier in the week and why they did it.
He expressed that he was very interested in finding out who was behind the sit-in that took place in Faizabad. In an attempt to express his frustration over the fact that the decision that was announced on February 6th has not been implemented yet, he said, “We are very interested in finding out who is behind it.”.
In addition to the Chief Justice Imam Inam Isa, there are two other members of the hearing bench, Justice Aminuddin and Justice Athar Minallah, who are also participating in hearings. The hearing bench is headed by Chief Justice Imam Inam Isa.
A number of questions have been asked by the chief justice during the hearing of the sit-in case pertaining to what steps the government is taking to implement the SC’s decision regarding the sit-in case.
There is no one caring about this country in Pakistan, according to the country’s chief justice, Isa, while on the other hand, justice Minallah said that the country has been occupied by a supreme class for the past 70 years and that nothing has changed in this regard.
As a dig at the government’s lack of seriousness in dealing with the case, Chief Justice of Pakistan Isa said that the court would be obliged to close the case if the government requests it to be done so.
It will take us until another tragedy like the one in Faizabad occurs before we can do anything else about it. Is it the enemy attacking us from the outside or are there threats coming from within?” he asked, refusing to take part in the government’s fact-finding committee.
As the chief justice said, this country is prone to people getting up and blocking the roads, then going abroad after harming the country in that way.
As a result of the chief justice’s remark, there were hints that Tahirul Qadri, the head of Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT), may have been involved in the 2014 sit-in by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) against then-Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) government in the national capital.
“Did you import that person with the intention of overthrowing the government at that time, or was it for some other purpose? ” It was further asked by CJP Isa, whether the services of the said individual would once again be sought by the court over the future.
It would appear that the Canadian individual paid for his own ticket in this case.
In his opinion, the Election Commission of Pakistan was not independent at that point because it was under the authority of Pemra, the Pakistani Electronic Media Regulatory Authority.
After that, the court summoned the chairman of Pemra, Salim Baig, to the rostrum of the court.
Pemra lawyer Isa is grilled by CJP Isa
According to the chief justice, the employees of Pemra rarely work, but rather come to the court to discuss the work they perform.
The incumbent chairman of Pemra was asked if he had read the report that was prepared by Absar Alam, his predecessor, before taking office.
“I have not yet received a copy of the report that was requested by the court,” said Pemra lawyer Hafiz S A Rehman in response to the court’s order.
As well as expressing displeasure with the sudden withdrawal of nine revision petitions, the chief justice expressed discontent with the whole process.
What is the point of filing revision petitions and then withdrawing them? Is it a joke to do that? ” This question was raised by CJP Isa.
During a meeting with Pemra’s counsel, he stated he had only received Absar Alam’s affidavit.
In an interview with the lawyer for Pemra, the chief justice grilled him. On the other hand, he summoned the director-general of operations from Pemra to the podium to address the meeting.
There was an earlier comment made by Justice Minallah in which he described the decision in the Faizabad sit-in case as a landmark. However, the chief justice disagreed, stating that it was only in accordance with the law and the Constitution that it was done.
+ There are no comments
Add yours