TLYRA leadership: secretary defence, AGP summoned by Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday summoned secretary defense and attorney general for Pakistan (AGP) to the court on the next hearing to inform the court about the financial details of the Tehreek-e-Labbaik Ya Rasool Allah (TLYRA) leadership. Hundreds of workers of TLYRA had staged a sit-in at Faizabad Interchange for around three weeks in November last year, bringing the federal capital to a standstill.
A two-member bench comprising Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Qazi Faez Isa was hearing the suo motu case against the Faizabad sit-in. It also directed the government to appoint chairman Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) before the next date of hearing and warned if chairman is not appointed by that time then strict action will be taken against the authorities responsible for the appointment.
The court summoned defense secretary as director general (legal) of the ministry failed to respond to most of the court queries. The court expressed its dissatisfaction over the Pemra report that 'strict warning' issued against private TV Channel, 92. The court said the action taken against the Channel 92 for live transmission of Faizabad sit-in is cosmetic.
Justice Faez asked Pemra's counsel Hafiz SA Rehman what the punishment is for violation of law, and himself stated according Pemra law, if any channel commits violation then its license can be revoked or penalty be imposed on it. He said Pemra favors a few selected channels. The court questioned why the transmission of Dawn News and Geo TV channels in the cantonments is halted. "If any cannel is violating the law then action should be taken against it, but level playing field should be provided to all the channels and their transmission be freely available across the country." Justice Faez remarked that even in martial law regimes the media was free.
Justice Qazi Faez Isa questioned who would decide that this or that channel's transmission should not be shown in the cantonments. He said the transmissions of those channels pursuing anti-country agenda are still going on all over the country. Justice Faez inquired from Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Sohail Mehmood if anything is written in the Constitution or law that the cantonments are not in Pakistan or a separate country. "We have already lost half of the country," he remarked and questioned; "How further do you want it to be divided?"
Justice Faez said the people who surrounded Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah had created Pakistan, adding there was no brigade. He also said: "My father and mother were in Muslim League." He said, "fighting is not good but if we have to fight then it should be with the enemy and not with the fellow countrymen. "We are not scared of enemy but are afraid of our own people," he added.
Justice Faez inquired from the DAG what the source of income of Khadim Hussain Rizvi, chief TLYRA, is and whether he has a bank account and pays tax. The judge said that on 16th February they had directed the intelligence agencies to provide details regarding Rizvi but they have not done it so far. The DAG informed that Khadim Hussain is a Khateeb of a mosque and running a religious seminary. He said that people give him contributions and for sit-in, the TLYRA had collected Rs 3.5 million
Justice Faez asked whether the seminary was getting funds to finance such kind of activity [sit-in]. He further asked how the ISI knew that Rs 3.5 million were collected for the sit-in, adding if the ISI was counting that amount. Justice Mushir Alam said all the agencies don't know about source of income and bank accounts of Rizvi. He asked whether any audit is carried out about his bank account. He asked: "Is there no authority to regulate and control their activities?"
Justice Faez said in the next hearing the high officials of ISI should be present in the courtroom. He said if the officials of intelligence agencies cannot deliver then they should leave their job. Justice Faez said: "I am in the Supreme Court to do justice. I would not remain in the SC if I am not able to render justice." The judge said the state always stands behind victims and does not support the oppressors. Later, the case was adjourned for 10 days.