Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa on Monday expressed his dissatisfaction with the report submitted by an inquiry commission formed to investigate the Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakis­tan’s (TLP) 2017 Faizabad sit-in, remarking that the probe body was not even aware of its responsibility.

The top judge’s remarks come as a three-member Supreme Court bench took up a set of review petitions filed against the SC’s 2019 judgement in the Faizabad sit-in case.

The bench — headed by Justice Isa, and also including Justice Irfan Saadat Khan and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan — presided over the hearing today, which was broadcast live on the Supreme Court website and YouTube channel.

Authored by Justice Isa in 2019, years before he took oath as the chief justice, the searing judgement had instructed the defence ministry and the tri-services chiefs to penalise personnel under their command who were found to have violated their oath.

It had also directed the federal government to monitor those advocating hate, extremism and terrorism, and to prosecute them in accordance with the law.

Adverse observations were also made against several government departments for causing inconvenience to the public as the 20-day sit-in paralysed life in both Islamabad and Rawalpindi.

Pleas were subsequently moved against the verdict by the Ministry of Defence, the Intelligence Bureau (IB), the PTI, Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra), the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), the Mutta­hida Qaumi Movement (MQM), AML chief Sheikh Rashid and Ijazul Haq.

However, most of the petitioners withdrew their pleas, prompting the CJP to ask “why is everyone so afraid to speak the truth”.

During a previous hearing, former Pemra chief Absar Alam had made revelations on the interference of intelligence agencies and “media coercion” during the Faizabad sit-in.

In a subsequent hearing, CJP Isa had linked violence in the country on May 9, when PTI chief Imran Khan was arrested, to the non-implementation of its 2019 judgment in the case.

In an order issued on the petitions in November, the SC had stated that it expects the government to finalise the fact-finding probe on the sit-in within the specified time frame. It had also granted ECP one month to prepare and submit a report on the TLP and its funding.

Although the primary objective of setting up the Faizabad commission was to fix responsibility for the failures that led to the TLP sit-in spiralling out of control, the commission’s report had stopped short of placing the blame directly on any individual’s shoulders.

Click to see more

During the hearing today, CJP Isa expressed his dismay at the report compiled and submitted by the commission, noting that it was not according to the Terms of Reference (ToRs).

The hearing

CJP Isa inquired whether the AGP had seen the report submitted by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), to which the latter replied in the negative.

The chief justice then directed the AGP to review the ECP report and gave a break in the hearing.

After the hearing resumed, Justice Isa expressed his indignation over the report.

The AGP informed the court the commission’s head was present and could be questioned.

He recalled that Gen (rtd) Faiz Hameed had told the commission that it was not the Inter-Services Intelligence’s (ISI) responsibility to look into the financial support of terrorists.

“If it’s not their responsibility then whose responsibility is it?” Justice Isa retorted. He questioned what kind of report the commission had made and inquired where the rest of its members were.

While scrutinising the report, CJP Isa pointed out that while one paragraph said it was not the ISI’s responsibility, another said no evidence was found of TLP being financially assisted.

Justice Isa asked the AGP to reflect on how much loss the country had suffered because of the Faizabad sit-in. “Kill, vandalise and leave; what method is this?”

Expressing his dismay at the report, CJP Isa said, “I cannot comprehend what level of mind prepared this report. The commission does not even know what its responsibility was.”

“The commission prepared the report based on Gen Hameed’s statement,” he remarked. “No one cares about the loss to Pakistan,” the top judge said, asking about the whereabouts of other commission members.

“Let’s assume that the Punjab government pelted stones and also set cars on fire; whose government was it in Punjab at the time?” CJP Isa asked, to which the AGP replied that Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif was the province’s chief minister back then.

“The report mentions Punjab inspector general,” Justice Isa noted, remarking, “It seems there was an old feud with the IG so that the score is even.”

“The right to protest is a part of democracy but the right to kill is not. Those who do so must be taken to task,” the chief justice asserted.

“What sort of report is this?” the CJP quipped, stating that the nation’s time was wasted through it.

“There is no mention of TLP workers in the report. Were the TLP workers called? They weren’t,” the court observed, adding that the “truth might have come forward if TLP workers” had been summoned by the commission.

Here, Justice Khan noted, “The statements of those who sent breakfast and food are on the record.” CJP Isa highlighted that the TLP workers’ statements were the only ones not recorded.

Censuring the report for merely stating that “legislation is present that can be implemented upon”, the top judge wondered what the need for forming a commission was after all.

Justice Isa referred to the report calling the multiple review petitions a “pleasant coincidence” and wondered if “there was no conductor or orchestrator” behind the pleas. He pointed out that “no other case had such ‘pleasant coincidence’”.

“Someone must have approved the review petitions and hired a lawyer; where is the entire record?” he asked. “This is a grade-five [student’s] statement that is being filed in the SC,” Justice Isa quipped while referring to the report.

The chief justice further remarked that it seemed the commission members “did not even head out of their office” to compile the report. Upon asking where its members’ office was situated, AGP Awan replied that the it was in the interior ministry.

Justice Isa also noted that the violent incidents of May 12, 2007 that took place in Karachi had been ignored by the commission.

“We had ordered to take action on it. Who said it was not in the ISI’s domain?” the CJP questioned, to which the AGP answered that Gen Hameed had stated so.

“He said it so the commission considered it a decree. Why is Gen Faiz being mentioned repeatedly? Either tell that he had the authority to take all actions or he did not,” CJP Isa said.

The top judge then pointed out contradictory statements within the commission’s report.

“At one point, it’s written that Gen Faiz Hameed did not call former Pemra chairman Absar Alam on the phone to reopen a TV channel. In their same report at another point, they have written that Gen Hameed did call Absar Alam,” Justice Isa observed.

“What sort of joke is this that the commission took Absar Alam sahib’s statement on oath but did not take one from Gen Hameed when he recorded his statement?”, Justice Afghan asked.

While dictating the day’s order, CJP Isa noted, “In our opinion, the report is not according to the Terms of Reference (ToRs). It is surprising that no statement from any TLP member was recorded.”

He remarked that the commission “assumed that travelling to Islamabad for protest was not in accordance with the Constitution” while the SC judgment had declared that peaceful protests were a person’s right.

“A glimpse of provincialism can be seen in the commission’s report,” the court noted.

Here, Justice Afghan asked how the ISI could say that probing terror financing was not its jurisdiction, highlighting that people’s identity cards were blocked in Balochistan based on the agency’s reports.

“The ISI is a part of border committees in Balochistan. It reports that so and so person is involved in financially assisting terrorists,” he added.

“But in front of the commission, they are taking the stance that they have no connection,” Justice Afghan observed.

Faizabad commission report

The commission, led by retired IG Syed Akhtar Ali Shah and also comprising former Islamabad police chief Tahir Alam Khan and additional interior secretary Khushal Khan, was constituted to ensure compliance with the 2019 SC judgment.

For­med to investigate the causes and subsequent events leading to the omission and commission of acts not in accordance with the law, the body had suggested legislation.

It also proposed drafting rules and SOPs to regulate the working of intelligence agencies since the involvement of the army or its affiliated agency in civilian matters adversely affected the fair image of the institution.

“Army is a sacred arm of the state, therefore to avoid criticism, the institution may not be involved in public matters. This task may be assigned to [the Intelligence Bureau] and civil administration,” it said.

The commission also suggested against using the paramilitary Rangers and Frontier Constabulary (FC) in urban areas and asked for a zero-tolerance policy for violent extremism. It also criticised past agreements with militant groups as a temporary fix that did not work.

It also said that since no one from the then-premier, former law and interior ministers, and the former Punjab chief minister had accused intelligence agencies of facilitating the protesters, nor was any evidence furnished to this effect, the commission could not connect any organisation or state official with the TLP sit-in.

Review petitions

The IB’s review petition had urged the court to set aside the adverse observations made against the department, adding that it was the premier civilian intelligence agency responsible for state security.

It had contended that the impugned order created a “bad impression” on the public that the IB was involved in unlawful activities and politics, after transgressing constitutional boundaries.

It had said the observations made in the verdict were based on “vague facts” and that during the sit-in, the department was in close contact with the federal and Punjab governments and forewarned them about the plans and intentions of the TLP, with a view to foiling their attempt to storm/lockdown Islamabad.

Meanwhile, In response, the defence ministry had requested the court to set aside the explicit or implicit observations about the armed forces and/or the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).

The ministry’s petition had said that a host of factors may affect morale. However, it said, what was fatal was the belief amongst the rank and file that their officers while acting like “self-proclaimed saviours” were violating the fundamental rights of citizens and instead of serving “Pakistan and thus all its citizens”, supporting a “particular political party, faction or politician”.

“…When the source of such remarks is the highest court in the land, it can promote fissiparous tendencies and has the capacity to destroy the ability of the armed forces to act as a cohesive fighting force,” the review petition had argued.

It had further said there was no evidence before the court to suggest that the armed forces or ISI were, in any manner, involved with either the sit-in or a particular outcome of the general elections of 2018 or the abridgement of free speech or intimidation or censorship of the press.

In its petition, the ECP had contended that it had comprehensively applied and enforced the Constitution, law and code of conduct by issuing a letter to the TLP on Aug 16, 2017, asking the party to provide details of its bank account and even had issued notices to it with a warning to cancel its registration.

Meanwhile, the PTI had questioned the mention in the verdict of the 2014 joint sit-in organised by it and the Pakistan Awami Tehreek in Islamabad, and had said the impression one gets from it was that the party conducted an illegal protest for publicity and deliberately made wrong allegations.

The petition contended that the party had nothing to do with the TLP Faizabad sit-in and therefore the remarks should be expunged.

Rashid had approached the court to remove his name from the judgement. In his petition, the AML chief pleaded that if the words concerning him in para-4 of the judgement were not expunged, he would suffer adversely in his life.

Faizabad sit-in

Daily life in Islamabad was disrupted for 20 days (from Oct 2 to Nov 27, 2017) when protesters belonging to religiopolitical parties occupied the Faizabad Interchange which connects Rawalpindi and Islamabad through the Islamabad Expressway and Murree Road, both of which are the busiest roads in the twin cities.

The agitators claimed that during the passage of the Elections Act 2017, the Khatm-i-Nabuwwat oath was deliberately modified as part of a larger conspiracy. The amendment to the oath was deemed a “clerical error” by the government and was subsequently rectified through an act of Parliament.

The government had attempted to negotiate in vain with the protesters to end the sit-in several times. Finally, it launched an operation to disperse the protesters, in which at least six people were killed and scores others injured. After the botched operation, the government decided to call in the army for help.

Negotiations were undertaken with protesters once again, and the government accepted a number of their demands in return for ending the protest. The agreement document bears the signatures of then interior minister Ahsan Iqbal, TLP chief Khadim Hussain Rizvi, and Gen Faiz Hameed among others.