The Islamabad High Court (IHC) faces a jurisdictional challenge as the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) Advocate General, Shah Faisal Uthmankhel, formally contested the court’s authority to issue directives regarding the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) protest scheduled for September 27.
The dispute centers on a petition seeking to block the PTI rally. During proceedings, the KP Advocate General argued that the IHC’s reach does not extend to the provincial administration of KP, asserting that the provincial government operates under its own legal and constitutional mandate.
The court is now balancing the petitioner’s concerns—centered on potential public disruption and security risks in the capital—against the provincial government’s insistence on autonomy. The Advocate General’s stance effectively warns the court against overstepping into provincial matters, creating a legal standoff that could complicate how the administration handles the upcoming demonstration.
Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, presiding over the case, questioned the provincial government’s role in facilitating the march. The court pushed back, asking why the provincial machinery was being utilized to transport protesters toward Islamabad.
The petitioner argues that the protest will paralyze the capital, citing past rallies that led to road closures and significant economic losses. The legal team for the petitioner told the court that the state has a duty to ensure the movement of citizens is not obstructed by political agitation.
The PTI, meanwhile, remains adamant that the rally is a constitutional right. Party leaders have signaled that they will not be deterred by legal hurdles or administrative barriers, framing the September 27 protest as a necessary push against current government policies.
This challenge reflects the deepening friction between the federal judiciary, the Islamabad administration, and the PTI-led government in KP. By questioning the IHC’s jurisdiction, the KP administration is setting a precedent that could limit federal judicial intervention in provincial political mobilization.
As the date approaches, the legal wrangling suggests that the protest will be as much a battle in the courtroom as it is on the streets. Whether the IHC asserts its authority or yields to the provincial objection will determine the legal framework for all future political gatherings in the capital.
