ISLAMABAD:The district administration of Islamabad has granted Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) permission to hold a rally in the provincial capital on August 22, Islamabad High Court (IHC) was informed.
Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb presided over the hearing on a contempt of court petition for not granting permission for a protest to the former ruling party.
The PTI lawyer argued that they had submitted a request on July 22 to hold a protest on July 26. The court inquired about the decision that led to the contempt of court claim, to which the state council responded that two orders had been passed. The court noted that it had been documented that protests or rallies could take place after August 20.
The court addressed the PTI lawyer, remarking that there was no basis for a contempt of court claim in this situation. The judge highlighted that a request had been sent to PTI and that the blocking of Faizabad was causing harm to the nation, referencing the previous sit-in at Islamabad’s D-Chowk that resulted in deaths due to blocked ambulance access.
In a discussion with the state council, the court pointed out that if the ruling party requested permission, it seemed to be granted more readily, emphasising that this should not be the case just because PTI was in opposition. The court expressed surprise at whether permission had been granted for protests in a park.
The court emphasised the need to maintain parks as public spaces and suggested establishing rules to designate specific areas for protests, cautioning against turning the country into a “banana republic.” The court expressed concern that the current situation was deterring people from visiting the country.
Justice Miangul questioned whether the contempt of court claim was valid and stated that he would pass an order on the matter. The state council reiterated that the district administration had indeed granted PTI permission to hold a rally on August 22.
The PTI lawyer clarified that their application was for a protest outside the Press Club, not a rally, and that the case for rally permission was in the Chief Justice’s court, separate from their protest application.
