Tyrian White case: Islam wants people’s personal lives private, says IHC
The petitioner Hafiz Ehtesham alleged that Prime Minister Imran Khan did not reveal that he had a daughter ‘Tyrian’ in his nomination papers. “He lied about his daughter that’s why he is not Sadiq and Ameen.”
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday dismissed a petition seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Imran Khan and said a fine would be imposed on similar petition if received in future.
Division bench of Islamabad High Court comprising Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Mian Gul Hasan Aurangzeb resumed the hearing of the petition submitted by Hafiz Ehtesham, spokesperson of the Lal Masjid's Shuhada Foundation.
The petitioner Hafiz Ehtesham alleged that the prime minister did not reveal that he had a daughter ‘Tyrian’ in his nomination papers. “He lied about his daughter that’s why he is not Sadiq and Ameen.”
During the hearing, Justice Athar Minallah questioned the petitioner that had he read the Article 63(H)? Justice Athar further remarked that if he had checked Article 63(h), which deals with moral issues, and said the first principle of Islam is to keep someone’s personal life private. Therefore, private matters of any person should not be brought in the court, the judge remarked.
To this, the petitioner Ehtesham argued in court Imran Khan is public officeholder and therefore his personal matters could not be considered beyond scrutiny. To this, Justice Minallah remarked Article 63(1)(h) of the Constitution, under which the petitioner had sought PM Khan's disqualification. The Article 63(1)(h) stipulates that a person convicted of a crime of "moral turpitude" and sentenced to jail for not less than two years can contest elections if five years have lapsed since his release.
The judge further remarked that in Islam, it has been said that one should attempt to brush other’s private matters under the carpet. To this, the petitioner argued that yes Islam has forbidden to discuss personal lives of others but it is also written in Article 62 (1)(d) that character of member National Assembly should be according to this.
To this, Justice Athar Minallah remarked that it means we should expunge Article 63 (h). He remarked, “Such petitions are only wastage of time.” Justice Minallah also warned the petitioner that if such requests were submitted in the future, the petitioner would be fined. PM Imran Khan’s counsel Dr Babar Awan was present in court. However, he did not need to present his arguments, as the court discarded the petition while hearing the petitioner.
-
Pentagon Threatens To Cut Ties With Anthropic Over AI Safeguards Dispute -
Meghan Markle's Father Shares Fresh Health Update -
Travis Kelce Takes Hilarious Jab At Taylor Swift In Valentine’s Day Post -
NASA Confirms Arrival Of SpaceX Crew-12 Astronauts At The International Space Station -
Can AI Bully Humans? Bot Publicly Criticises Engineer After Code Rejection -
Search For Savannah Guthrie’s Abducted Mom Enters Unthinkable Phase -
Imagine Dragons Star, Dan Reynolds Recalls 'frustrating' Diagnosis -
Steve Jobs Once Called Google Over Single Shade Of Yellow: Here’s Why -
Barack Obama Addresses UFO Mystery: Aliens Are ‘real’ But Debunks Area 51 Conspiracy Theories -
Selma Blair Explains Why Multiple Sclerosis 'isn't So Scary' -
Will Smith Surprises Wife Jada Pinkett With Unusual Gift On Valentine's Day -
Shamed Andrew Has Paid Royal Favours With ‘national Scandal’ -
Prince William Ticked Off By How Andrew ‘behaved With Staff’ -
Prince William Questions Himself ‘what’s The Point’ After Saudi Trip -
James Van Der Beek's Friends Helped Fund Ranch Purchase Before His Death At 48 -
King Charles ‘very Much’ Wants Andrew To Testify At US Congress