Alleged resettlement of militants: PHC rejects Aimal Wali’s plea seeking judicial probe
PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) has issued a detailed judgment rejecting a petition filed against the resettlement of militants in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
The court dismissed the request for the establishment of a high-level commission or a judicial inquiry led by a judge, stating that policymaking was the prerogative of the government, and the judiciary cannot interfere in such matters.
A two-member bench, comprising acting Chief Justice SM Atiqque Shah and Justice Sahibzada Asadullah, heard the petition filed by Awami National Party (ANP) President Senator Aimal Wali Khan.
Assistant Attorney General Daulat Khan and Additional Advocate General Asad Jan Durrani appeared before the court.Senator Aimal Wali Khan, in his petition, had alleged that militants were resettled in KP during the previous government of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), which he claimed led to a resurgence of terrorism in the province. He had requested the court to order the formation of a high-level commission or a judicial inquiry to uncover the truth and prevent further resettlement of militants.
The court, after hearing the arguments, dismissed the petition and issued a six-page detailed judgment authored by Justice Sahibzada Asadullah. The judgment stated that the petitioner failed to present any evidence proving the violation of fundamental rights. It emphasized that policymaking fell under the executive authority, and the court cannot intervene in such decisions.
The judgment further highlighted that an unpopular government policy cannot be declared invalid solely on that basis. It acknowledged the severe impact of terrorism on Khyber Pakhtunkhwa over the past several decades, resulting in the loss of thousands of lives, including law enforcement personnel and civilians, and causing economic damage amounting to billions of dollars.
The court noted that terrorism had tarnished Pakistan’s international image, particularly affecting Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and several political leaders had been assassinated in suicide attacks. The ruling clarified that the legislature, executive, and judiciary were the pillars of the state, each with its distinct roles and responsibilities. While the judiciary was responsible for delivering justice and interpreting the Constitution and laws, it cannot interfere in policy matters.
The judgment advised the petitioner to raise his concerns in parliament, where the federal government had the authority to establish a commission if deemed necessary. It concluded that if Senator Aimal Wali had further reservations, he should approach the relevant government institutions, rendering the petition non-maintainable.
-
Trump Administration Labeled ‘misogynistic’ Following Dismissal Of Pam Bondi And Kristi Noem -
Trump Mocks Starmer As UK–US Tensions Rise Over Defence -
'Peaky Blinders' Has Major Casting Shakeup For Lead Role In Upcoming Sequel Series -
Quantum Computing Threat: Why Global Cybersecurity Could Collapse Soon -
Jessica Simpson Reveals Rare Approach To Mastering 'Daisy Duke's Glow -
Princess Beatrice’s Real Feelings About Andrew, Fergie: ‘They Ruined Nearly Every Aspect Of Her Life & Marriage’ -
AI Cyberattacks Set To Outpace Human Hackers, Experts Warn -
China Tightens Rules On Digital Humans And Addictive Kids’ Content: Here’s Why -
Britney Spears’ Eldest Son Pays Quiet Tribute To Popstar After Latest Reunion -
Prince Harry, Meghan Get Sweet Chance To Reunite With Royal Family In Britain -
US Disrupts Global Malaria And HIV Supply Chains, Sparking Health Crisis Fears -
King Charles Holds Key To Meeting Prince Archie, Princess Lilibet -
Meryl Streep Claps Back At ‘The Devil Wears Prada’ Being A ‘chick Flick’ -
Uffizi Galleries Hit By Cyberattack, Valuables Moved To Bank -
Why Google Launched The Gemma 4 AI Model: Here’s Everything To Know -
Royal Family Secret Travel Rules: Why Members Always Pack A Black Outfit