IHC rules political protests subject to law, basic rights of citizens cannot be compromised

ISLAMABAD, Sep 18 (APP):Islamabad High Court (IHC) has held that any activity affecting the fundamental rights of citizens would constitute a violation of the Constitution, warning that public officials responsible for compromising such rights could face consequences for breach of law and their oath.

A larger bench comprising Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, Justice Muhammad Azam Khan and Justice Muhammad Asif issued its 37-page detailed judgment in a petition filed by trader Waqas Ahmad against the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) proposed long march towards Islamabad on September 27.

The court observed that political parties enjoyed the constitutional right to peaceful assembly and political dissent, while citizens were equally entitled to protection of their lives, liberty, dignity, freedom of movement and business activities. It emphasized the need to maintain a constitutional balance between the right to political protest and the fundamental rights of citizens, observing that the right to protest was subject to the Constitution and law.

The court noted that Article 15 guaranteed citizens freedom of movement within Pakistan, while Article 16 provided the right to peaceful and unarmed assembly. Restrictions on assembly could only be imposed under law and to the extent reasonably required in the public interest. Article 17 guaranteed the right to form associations and unions, subject to lawful restrictions in the interest of public order. The bench also highlighted the importance of ensuring the uninterrupted functioning of constitutional institutions in Islamabad and citizens’ access to hospitals, educational institutions and courts.

Referring to previous political protests, the court observed that it was regrettable that assurances given to courts and judicial directions had repeatedly been disregarded. It noted that an assurance given before the Supreme Court had allegedly been violated by the PTI founder, while the High Court had also issued a judgment regarding the November 2024 protest that was not implemented.

The court said the case before it was not based merely on speculation, but involved a history of disregard for judicial orders and assurances by a political party. The judgment further observed that government resources of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa had been used for political purposes during a previous march. Such use of provincial resources, it said, undermined the protection of fundamental rights of Islamabad’s residents.

The court held that aggression by a provincial entity against the federation in the form of a march, rally or procession would be unconstitutional and unlawful. It made it clear that government funds, vehicles, machinery or officials could not be used for a political march towards Islamabad.

The court observed that peaceful protest was a constitutional right, but an armed march or one conducted through government resources did not enjoy constitutional protection. Disrupting civic life, businesses, education and freedom of movement to exert political pressure on Islamabad could not be treated as part of the right to protest.

The court further held that the right to hold a long march was subject to law, and that laying siege to the federal capital or suspending the fundamental rights of citizens could not be claimed as a constitutional right. The petition was disposed of with the above directions.