When SC castigated ISI for aiding extremist group

By Editor Sep29,2023

Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez on September 29 expressed his  unhappiness over the government’s failure to implement the Supreme Court’s order on the 2017 Faizabad sit-in. The case involved the role of ISI, Pakistan Army and extremist organisation, Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP). The ISI was seen to be helping the extremist outfit by handing out money to withdraw the street protests. The ISI operation was run by former ISI chief Faiz Hameed.

The Supreme Court had then taken the case suo moto and issued directives to the government, especially the ISI. 

The ruling said : All intelligence agencies (including ISI, IB and MI) and the  ISPR must not exceed their respective mandates. They cannot curtail the freedom of speech and expression and do not have the authority to interfere with broadcasts and publications, in the management of broadcasters/publishers and in the distribution of newspapers.

Pursuant to the judgment in Air Marshal Asghar Khan’s case the involvement of ISI and of the members of the Armed Forces in politics, media and other “unlawful activities” should have stopped.

Instead when TLP’s dharna participants received cash handouts from men in uniform106 the perception of their involvement gained traction. The Director General of the Inter-Services Public

Relations (“ISPR”) has also taken to commenting on political matters: “history will prove the 2018 general elections were transparent”

The Armed The Armed Forces, and all agencies manned by the personnel of the Armed Forces, including ISI, Military Intelligence (“MI”) and ISPR serve Pakistan, and thus all its citizens. They must

never be perceived to support a particular political party, faction or politician. If any personnel of the Armed Forces indulges in any form of politicking or tries to manipulate the media he undermines the integrity and professionalism of the Armed Forces.ISI states that it cannot monitor the financials of those advocating violence and carrying out violent acts. However, in the context of terrorism, the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 does envisage a role for “Intelligence Agencies, Armed Forces and Civil Armed Forces”

Intelligence agencies should not ignore those who promote violence and hate. If the proponents of violent ideology and action are not monitored and checked they often mutate against the State and terrorize the people. Those who resort to abuse, hate and violence should never be pampered, instead they should fear the State, its police and intelligence agencies.

Read the full judgement here

By Editor

Related Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *