PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) has sought a response from the attorney general on Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) legal challenge to governor’s rule and the imposition of an emergency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP).
A two-judge bench comprising Justice Ijaz Anwar and Justice Faheem Wali heard the petitions filed by PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Khan and Advocate Salman Khan. The petitioners have asked the court to declare the federal government’s measures unconstitutional and strike them down.
The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N)-led federal government imposed governor’s rule and an emergency in KP on October 11. The province has been governed by the party founded by Imran Khan since 2013.
The federal government justified its decision by pointing to an increase in terrorist attacks and what it described as insufficient cooperation from the provincial administration in counterterrorism operations.
Following the decision, KP Governor Faisal Karim Kundi assumed responsibility for administering the province on behalf of the federal government, with support from an 11-member technocratic KP Advisory Council.
Peshawar High Court Hears PTI’s Constitutional Challenge
During Tuesday’s proceedings, Barrister Gohar Khan argued that the imposition of governor’s rule and the emergency coincided with the establishment of the advisory council and the transfer of 38 deputy commissioners.
The PTI chairman also alleged that 12 of the party’s members in the National Assembly and 13 members of the provincial assembly had been abducted.
He further claimed that PTI offices had been demolished and plaques commemorating the inauguration of development projects had been damaged. According to Gohar, these actions reflected discriminatory treatment of his party.
Earlier in the hearing, the petitioners’ lawyer maintained that an emergency could be imposed in circumstances involving war or external aggression, neither of which, he argued, existed in the province.
The counsel also contended that the provincial government retained the authority to take action against terrorism. He pointed out that terrorism had reached severe levels in the past without prompting the imposition of an emergency.
PTI Questions the Use of Article 234
A central issue in the Peshawar High Court PTI petitions is whether the constitutional conditions for imposing an emergency in the province were satisfied.
The petitioners’ counsel argued that Article 234 of Pakistan’s Constitution could be invoked only when a provincial government was unable to function in accordance with constitutional requirements.
According to the lawyer, both the KP government and provincial assembly remained operational, and no constitutional breakdown had occurred to justify the federal government’s intervention.
After hearing the arguments, Justice Ijaz Anwar said the court would seek the Attorney General’s Office’s position on the matter.
The bench subsequently issued a formal notice to the attorney general and adjourned the proceedings until November 10.
Court Seeks Responses Over Sohail Afridi’s Detention
In separate proceedings, the Peshawar High Court sought responses from government officials and other relevant authorities on petitions seeking the recovery of Sohail Afridi, KP Assembly Speaker Babar Saleem Swati and PTI provincial president Junaid Akbar.
Afridi, described in the report as the now-dysfunctional chief minister of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, is the subject of a separate recovery petition.
Justice Arshad Ali heard the petition concerning Afridi and issued notices to the provincial government, police and relevant officials. The authorities were directed to submit their responses within two days.
Notices Issued in Petitions for Swati and Akbar
A separate two-member bench comprising Justice Arshad Ali and Justice Farah Jamshed heard the petitions seeking the recovery of Assembly Speaker Babar Saleem Swati and PTI provincial president Junaid Akbar.
The court issued notices to the government, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa inspector general of police and other concerned authorities, directing them to respond within 10 days.
The proceedings mark two parallel legal developments: PTI’s challenge to the constitutional basis of governor’s rule and the emergency in KP, and petitions seeking the recovery of senior party figures.
The next hearing in the governor’s rule case is scheduled for November 10, when the court is expected to consider the response from the attorney general’s office.
