The Deputy Commissioner of District East on Friday told the Sindh High Court that the request of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf to hold a public meeting in Mazar-e-Quaid could not be granted due to imminent threat to life and property of the public. admitted for at least four weeks.
While hearing a petition filed by the PTI general secretary seeking permission to hold a public meeting, a panel headed by Chief Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi asked the provincial attorney general about granting permission for the public meeting.
The DC said that the SSP East has said that there is an imminent threat to life and property of the public as indicated in the alerts received in connection with the recent terrorist attack in Karachi.
He said permission to hold a public meeting could not be granted for at least four weeks until the menace was neutralized and favorable reports were received. Petitioner's counsel Ali Tahir said that the Central Muslim League recently held a public meeting on Shahra-e-Qaideen and another political party Jamaat-e-Islami also held its public meeting at the nearby Nishtar Park on April 28.
The court asked the provincial lawyer when the law and order situation would improve and the administration would allow the petitioner's party to hold a public meeting. The lawyer said the administration is monitoring the situation and permission will be granted until the threat is neutralized.
After taking the DC's report on record, the court directed the provincial government to submit a progress report with respect to the security clearance and adjourned the hearing to May 6.
PTI General Secretary Ali Ahmed Palh said in the petition that the party wants to hold a peaceful rally at Bagh-e-Jinnah on April 28 and has written to the Deputy Commissioner of East District for permission.
He added that despite receiving the application, the DC is yet to decide on it. The petitioner, Ali Tahir, said that the Constitution of Pakistan enshrines freedom of assembly as a fundamental right in Article 16 and that this Article guarantees every citizen the right to assemble peacefully and without arms, subject to reasonable restrictions imposed in the interest of public order. The High Court was asked to declare that the petitioner and his party were entitled to the protection of Article 16 and Article 17 of the Constitution and directed the DC to decide the petitioner's application.