PTI Sept 27 Protest: IHC Forms Larger Bench to Hear Plea

Islamabad High Court Forms Larger Bench for September 27 PTI Protest Petition

The legal challenge against the upcoming demonstrations was filed by a local citizen, Waqas Ahmed, who is represented in court by lawyer Akhtar Chheena. According to court proceedings covered by Dunya News and ARY News, the petitioner is a trader operating inside the federal capital who argues that his business will suffer direct disruption. Chief Justice Dogar opened the hearing by questioning how the petitioner qualified as an affected party, prompting the legal counsel to explain that Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi has announced plans to lead the demonstration directly into Islamabad.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that allowing political pressure through street demonstrations to secure legal relief creates a dangerous precedent. All these cases have to be decided according to law, lawyer Akhtar Chheena stressed during the hearing, adding that The only purpose [of the Sept 27 protest] is to exert pressure and obtain relief. The legal challenge also brings up deep security concerns linked to past events, specifically questioning whether the demonstration could mirror the violence of the November 2024 protests or trigger attacks similar to the May 9, 2023 assault on the General Headquarters in Rawalpindi.

Summons Issued to Provincial Police Chiefs and Officials for September 10 Hearing

To address the gravity of the constitutional questions raised, the Islamabad High Court bench—comprising Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfaraz Dogar, Justice Azam Khan, and Justice Muhammad Asif, as noted in Dunya News coverage—has summoned a wide array of top government and law enforcement officials. Notices have been issued to the attorney general for Pakistan, the chief secretaries and inspectors general of police across all four provinces, along with the advocate generals of the provinces and Islamabad.

Furthermore, the court ordered the personal attendance of the Islamabad chief commissioner, the Islamabad deputy commissioner, and the Islamabad inspector general of police. All summoned respondents must appear before the bench when proceedings resume on September 10. ARY News reported that the petitioner has formally named the inspectors general of police from all four provinces, the Islamabad Police, and the Motorway Police as respondents in the case.

Contrasting Legal Arguments and Precedents From Past Demonstrations

The courtroom arguments heavily referenced the violent fallout of the November 26 protests from the previous year, during which over 10,000 PTI supporters entered Islamabad despite a strict lockdown. Lawyer Chheena reminded the court that those clashes resulted in the deaths of three Rangers personnel and caused approximately Rs240 million in financial damages. Questioning how casualties occurred if the crowds were truly peaceful, the counsel pressed the judiciary to weigh whether heavy government machinery would once again be mobilized by provincial authorities to breach the capital.

To substantiate claims regarding the potential misuse of state resources, the petitioner’s counsel presented a Ministry of Interior letter dated November 21, 2024, alleging that official machinery was utilized during earlier marches. Turning to the legal standing of imprisoned PTI founder Imran Khan, the counsel pointed out that multiple appeals—including the £190m Al-Qadir Trust case—remain pending before the courts. Can the government direct the court to suspend the sentence in an appeal? Is this possible? the lawyer asked the bench, emphasizing the constitutional necessity of judicial independence over mob mobilization.