The much discussed Orange Line Metro Train (OLMT) in Lahore, to be executed at an estimated cost of USD 1.65 billion, is no doubt the top priority of the Punjab government which claims that 34 per cent of the civil work related to the project has been completed. Besides, 94 per cent of the pillars required to support the train’s elevated duct have already been constructed.
What worries the project managers, however, is the fact that construction work near 11 heritage sites along the OLMT has been halted by the Lahore High Court (LHC) under a stay order.
The stay order was passed by a division bench comprising Justice Abid Aziz Sheikh and Justice Shahid Karim on January 28 this year, on the ground that construction within 200-foot radius of the heritage sites is prohibited under the respective laws and allowed only if a certain procedure is followed and the required conditions are fulfilled. Petitioners including renowned civil society activists I.A. Rehman, Kamil Khan Mumtaz and Neelum Hussain had pointed out violation of rules protecting the heritages sites.
There are two laws -- the Punjab Special Premises (Preservation) Ordinance, 1985 and Antiquity Act, 1975 -- that put restriction on construction within the proposed buffer zones around heritage sites. The heritage sites that are covered under the LHC stay order include Shalamar Gardens, Gulabi Bagh Gateway, Buddhu ka Awa, Chauburji, Zebunnisa’s Tomb, Lakshmi Building, General Post Office, Aiwan-i-Auqaf, Supreme Court’s Lahore registry building, St. Andrews’ Presbyterian Church and Baba Mauj Darya Bukhari shrine.
Under the stay order, all OLMT-related construction work was supposed to be discontinued at the mentioned sites altogether. But several cases of violation have surfaced over time, says Maryam Hussain, an activist and associate professor at the National College of Arts (NCA).
Pointing out the Punjab government’s apparent disregard of court’s orders, she says, "Taking notice of the complaints, the LHC constituted a two-member commission that found violations of stay order at five of the heritage sites. For example, the civic agencies have been found carrying out sewage work around Zebunnisa’s Tomb on Multan Road as well as Lakshmi building. This activity was filmed by the locals using their mobile phones and the evidence helped the commission reach a conclusion."
It was around this time that the private counsel of the government Khawaja Haris Advocate disassociated himself from this case expressing his reservation over violation of the stay order by the Punjab government.
The situation at the moment is that the arguments related to the case have been closed and the final verdict is awaited.
Both the contesting camps are waiting anxiously for the court order and it is quite likely that the one at the losing end will challenge it in the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SCP). But one question confronting all involved in this legal battle is that what can be the likely solution in case the stance of the civil society gets vindicated in the court order. How will it be possible to save these 11 distinct points along a 27-km corridor that has 94 per cent of the pillars ready and it is not possible to circumvent these points due to space constraints?
Or, in a totally opposite situation, will the government be allowed to go ahead with the plan considering the fact that huge sums of money have already been put into this public project?
Intazar Mahdi Advocate, Executive Secretary of The Law Society, a non-profit working for the welfare of legal fraternity-states there is a precedent of Jail Road signal-free corridor where permission to construct it was granted by the Supreme Court as huge funds had already gone into this project stayed by LHC. But in this case, he says, the LHC has taken a strong stance and has not paid much heed to the government’s argument that they will face difficulty in securing funds for this project.
He also cites the court order that states: "Monetary loss, to say the least, can be recovered and retrieved. What cannot be retrieved… is the soul of a nation. If, in the construction of the project and thereafter during its operation upon completion, any harm is caused to the Special Immovable antiquity or Special premises, that would be irreparable and beyond retrieval."
Raheem ul Haque, an activist and Senior Research Fellow at Center for Public Policy & Governance (CPPG), FC College University, narrates that the NOCs for construction near heritage sites were definitely issued by the concerned authorities but the problem was that this was done under the undue influence of higher authorities.
He says that as the Director General Archeology hesitated from issuing these NOCs, he was replaced by a new one who issued these within two days.
This was hurriedly done, though the DG under section 22 of the Act of 1975 and discretion with Committee under section 11 of the Ordinance of 1985 to grant NOC can only be exercised in exceptional circumstances where there is no probability of any harm to these antiquity properties or special premises.
The DG and the Committee are required to give findings in respect of each site separately after recording reasons and obtaining expert opinion and site visits to the effect that no harm and damage is caused to any of the heritage sites but this process was not followed.
To a question about likely solutions, Haque says that in case the court order is in favour of the petitioners and the government agrees to perform its duty of safeguarding heritage sites, the only feasible option left is to build an underground passage from Chauburji to Shalimar.
"This is not a far-fetched idea," he insists, "as the original plan was to build a 7-km underground corridor to save the congested areas from demolitions and human displacements."
The case of Shalamar Gardens is even more sensitive as it is also on this list of UNSECO’s heritage sites. The UN body is quite concerned about the damage already done to the hydraulic tank system that now lies right in the middle of the road passing in front of the gardens and the likely damage to the gardens.