PESHAWAR: In the wake of the Federal Constitutional Court’s order stopping the Peshawar High Court from hearing cases under its constitutional jurisdiction, the high court’s administrative committee on Friday decided not to proceed with petitions filed under Article 199 of the Constitution on or after Oct 12.
Official sources said the committee, which met with PHC Chief Justice S.M.
Attique Shah in the chair, also decided not to entertain fresh petitions and return them to the petitioners, directing them to approach the ‘appropriate’ forum.
On Thursday, a two-member bench of the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) declared: ‘Since the armed forces have been called to act in aid of civil power in the entire province of KP pursuant to the Oct 11 order... the proceedings before the PHC instituted under Article 199 on or after Oct 12 shall, in terms of clause 4 of Article 245, remain suspended.
The PHC’s administrative committee met to review the legal position arising from the FCC’s order.
Besides the chief justice, the meeting was also attended by Senior Puisne Judge Ijaz Anwar, Justice Syed Arshad Ali, Justice Sahibzada Asadullah and Justice Mohammad Naeem Anwar.
An official told Dawn that the committee had directed the relevant high court offices not to fix for hearing writ petitions filed on or after Oct 12, in line withthe FCC’s order.
It also decided that fresh cases should not be entertained and should be returned to the petitioners to reach out to the ‘appropriate’ forum.
The decision will affect several highprofile cases filed under Article 199 of the Constitution, including petitions against the imposition of emergency and governor’s rule in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
It will also affect petitions regarding the alleged illegal detention or ‘abduction’ of dysfunctional Chief Minister Sohail Afridi, KP Assembly Speaker Babar Saleem Swati, PTI provincial president Junaid Akbar and several other lawmakers and PTI leaders.
The decision will also affect other categories of cases, especially those challenging the detention of PTI leaders and workers under the Maintenance of Public Order (MPO) Ordinance, as well as the cases involving the ongoing antiencroachment campaigns, habeas corpus pleas, service matters and family disputes.
The interior ministry issued an order on Oct 11 under Article 245 of the Constitution, authorising the deployment of Pakistan Army troops in aid of civil power in KP for the duration of the proclamation issued under Articles 232 and 234 of the Constitution.
Article 245(3) of the Constitution says: ‘A High Court shall not exercise any jurisdiction under Article 199 in relation to any area in which the Armed Forces of Pakistan are, for the time being, acting in aid of civil power in pursuance of Article 245: Provided that this clause shall not be deemed to affect the jurisdiction of the High Court in respect of any proceeding pending immediately before the day on which the Armed Forces start acting inaid of civil power.
Following the imposition of emergency in KP, authorities issued detention orders for PTI leaders and workers in large numbers under the MPO Ordinance. Dozens of petitions were later filed by aggrieved persons with the high court.
The FCC took up a set of petitions challenging the interim bail granted by the PHC to detainees arrested under the MPO Ordinance against surety bonds of Rs100,000 each.
It also directed KP advocate general Sanaullah Khan to submit a report to the court within seven days identifying areas in the province where the armed forces were no longer required to act in aid of civil power.
The FCC said it might consider modifying its order under Article 245 of the Constitution, which provided for the deployment of armed forces in aid of civil power, after examining the report.
It also issued notices to the respondents, observing that, as important questions involving the interpretation of the Constitution were involved, notice should also be issued to the attorney general for Pakistan under Order XXVII-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
More than 60 appeals challenging the high court’s interim orders had been fixed for hearing before the FCC. The appeals were filed by the additional chief secretary of the provincial home and tribal affairs department.
The FCC’s order has sparked debate among legal circles. Some believe it applies to all categories of petitions filed under Article 199 of the Constitution, while others insist that it is applicable only to petitions against detentions under the MPO Ordinance.