PHC seeks cabinet meeting minutes about ban on PTM

PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court on Tuesday directed the federal government to submit the cabinet meeting minutes regarding the ban on the proscribed organisation, Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement (PTM).

A two-member bench comprising Justice Sahibzada Asadullah and Justice Aurangzeb also ordered the additional attorney general to present these meeting minutes in a sealed envelope either in the courtroom or in the Judges’ Chamber.

The bench was hearing a petition filed by PTM leader Manzoor Pashteen and other members challenging the ban on the organisation. Advocates Attaullah Kundi and Jehanzaib Mehsud appeared on behalf of the petitioners.

The lawyers argued that the federal government had imposed the ban on PTM, alleging its involvement in anti-state activities. However, they contended that the ban was imposed in violation of legal procedures.

AAG Sanaullah informed the court that a summary presented to the cabinet had already been submitted along with comments, as per the court’s directives. However, the bench noted that these comments were not available in the case file before them. The AAG said that copies of the summary and the federal cabinet’s approval had already been provided to the petitioners.

Upon this, the petitioners’ lawyer argued that while the government suggested filing a review petition, the petitioners were still unaware of the specific grounds on which PTM had been declared a proscribed organisation. They stressed the need for access to the cabinet meeting minutes to understand the justification for the ban.

The AAG maintained that the meeting minutes were classified and sensitive and could not be disclosed in open court. Since the petitioners had already received copies of the summary and cabinet approval, he argued that providing the minutes was unnecessary.

However, the court ruled that if the federal government deemed the document sensitive and could not disclose it to the petitioners, it should be presented in a sealed envelope before the court or reviewed in the Judges’ Chamber. The hearing was then adjourned until March 25.