Why PTI did not file an FIR on Islamabad Massacre?

[carne]

 

[Sarkash]

There is no point until the real number is identified.

 

[Sohail Shuja]

First of all, PTI does not have a legal case. Barrister Gohar and Salman Akram Raja know it, that in the light of Islamabad High Court's decision against PTI, a march into Islamabad cannot be legally defended.

Secondly, there was a visit of a foreign delegation (President of Belarus) visiting PM house, therefore, their reasons to invoke Section 144 is perfectly justified in legal terms.

So, by bringing this case up to the court will be now to just add insult to the injuries as in the legal process, the courts will declare the protestors as miscreants. End of the story!

The only way to deal with it is to get a Judicial Commission who should be mandated only to look into the matter that were the protocols of deterring a civilian congregation were followed or not? Was the record of the death toll manipulated and forged?

These are the only legal grounds PTI is left with, but these grounds cannot be made available in the court room and unfortunately, we like it or not, but the courts have to function within their legal premise.

 

[Sohail Shuja]

No 1: Saad Rasool seems unaware of the Twenty-sixth Amendment Act, 2024 (26 of 2024), Section 10 (with effect from October 21, 2024), where the powers of Suo Moto action have been retracted from Supreme Court. So that is not even a question.

No 2: Why Saad Rasool is not mentioning the Orders of IHC, prohibiting any congregation in Islamabad?

which is also made a law under the present fascist Government and against which, PTI never filed a petition in the Supremem Court that this law stands directly against the basic human right.

In the presence of restraining orders from IHC, what is the position of PTI now?

I think that now every one is just saying what the millions of PTI followers want to listen (instead of the truth). They just want more clicks and hence more money. This is obfuscation of the truth.

Does he want to imply that people like Barrister Gohar, Salman Akram Raja and other lawyers in the PTI do not know this?

 

[4PeaceAndJustice]

First of all, PTI does not have a legal case. Barrister Gohar and Salman Akram Raja know it, that in the light of Islamabad High Court's decision against PTI, a march into Islamabad cannot be legally defended.

Secondly, there was a visit of a foreign delegation (President of Belarus) visiting PM house, therefore, their reasons to invoke Section 144 is perfectly justified in legal terms.

So, by bringing this case up to the court will be now to just add insult to the injuries as in the legal process, the courts will declare the protestors as miscreants. End of the story!

The only way to deal with it is to get a Judicial Commission who should be mandated only to look into the matter that were the protocols of deterring a civilian congregation were followed or not? Was the record of the death toll manipulated and forged?

These are the only legal grounds PTI is left with, but these grounds cannot be made available in the court room and unfortunately, we like it or not, but the courts have to function within their legal premise.

Section 144 or marching to D Chowk is not any ground for murdering people. The max penalty is jail time. Those who ordered the killings are murderers and need to be punished accordingly

 

[carne]

Section 144 or marching to D Chowk is not any ground for murdering people. The max penalty is jail time. Those who ordered the killings are murderers and need to be punished accordingly

https://twitter.com/x/status/1863663121237242198

 

[exitonce]

FIR

 

[Sohail Shuja]

Section 144 or marching to D Chowk is not any ground for murdering people. The max penalty is jail time. Those who ordered the killings are murderers and need to be punished accordingly

And what if the person resists an arrest U/S 144 and becomes violent towards the LEA person? Should the LEA person run away?

What if the protestor is suspected to be armed with a heavy stone or a baton which could kill the LEA person or render an irreparable loss of his vital organs?

There are many avenues through which the law looks at things.

The only way to save the honor of the PTI workers killed in this clash is to ask for a Judicial Inquiry. The courts will simply declare the ones killed as miscreants who were marching towards the capital against a judicial order and also tried to resist arrest.

 

[4PeaceAndJustice]

And what if the person resists an arrest U/S 144 and becomes violent towards the LEA person? Should the LEA person run away?

What if the protestor is suspected to be armed with a heavy stone or a baton which could kill the LEA person or render an irreparable loss of his vital organs?

There are many avenues through which the law looks at things.

The only way to save the honor of the PTI workers killed in this clash is to ask for a Judicial Inquiry. The courts will simply declare the ones killed as miscreants who were marching towards the capital against a judicial order and also tried to resist arrest.

There is no evidence of these allegations against protesters.If these were true, the government would not have denied opening fire. They would have said that they opened fire and killed protesters because it was a legitimate use of force. But they are afraid to even accept any firing was done. Protesters act in the same way all over the democratic world as you can search videos of protests in western countries. But firing on protesters only happens in the worst dictatorships and is condemned all over the world

 

[ocean5]

hello you intelligent sahafees or journalists why you think filing an fir is important what is the end rezult what happened to arshad shareef fir what happened to model town fir what happened to imran khan shooting fir.no need of any fir just straight revenge brothers.dont waste your time in filing fir straight revenge and anyone who is promoting to file an fir just put some in his head also.who what soever said anything give him answer straight

 

[Sohail Shuja]

There is no evidence of these allegations against protesters.If these were true, the government would not have denied opening fire. They would have said that they opened fire and killed protesters because it was a legitimate use of force. But they are afraid to even accept any firing was done.

So you mean to say that no LEA personnel was injured or attacked during the protest? Sorry, but I think you have not seen the mob action where many policemen and rangers' personnel were beaten and thrown off the bridges. There are such videos circulating by the PTI follower accounts on SM too. Do you want me to post some over here?

Protesters act in the same way all over the democratic world as you can search videos of protests in western countries.

I have not seen any peaceful protest in a democratic country which is held at a place forbidden by their courts. I will be thankful if you can give counter examples to negate my point of view.

But firing on protesters only happens in the worst dictatorships and is condemned all over the world

Agreed. But always remember that in worst form of dictatorship, the courts also take a very narrow approach. That is why I am of the opinion that instead of filing FIRs of the incident, PTI should press for a Judicial Inquiry into the matter.

Courts always interpret law in its narrow sense and are not supposed to consider elements beyond the written/stipulated law. On the other hand, law is made by the parliamentarians. Adding insult to the injuries, PTI has failed miserably in the parliament to impede the draconian laws enacted by this corrupt regime. So, in the presence of the present law of the land, PTI is on the wrong side, by throwing away the restraining orders of Islamabad High Court.

Conversely speaking, a Judicial Commission works under the Terms of Reference (TORs) set by both the parties (opposition + ruling parties). Therefore, it has a wider range of powers to examine the case under review, which warrants to look into the matter with the perspective of natural law and jurisprudence, rather than an enacted law. So, only in a Judicial Commission, the case can be presented as a matter of freedom of expression. In the court of law, it will only be a case of killing the protestors who were legally prohibited to stage a protest inside the Capital Territory.

 

[4PeaceAndJustice]

So you mean to say that no LEA personnel was injured or attacked during the protest? Sorry, but I think you have not seen the mob action where many policemen and rangers' personnel were beaten and thrown off the bridges. There are such videos circulating by the PTI follower accounts on SM too. Do you want me to post some over here?


I have not seen any peaceful protest in a democratic country which is held at a place forbidden by their courts. I will be thankful if you can give counter examples to negate my point of view.


Agreed. But always remember that in worst form of dictatorship, the courts also take a very narrow approach. That is why I am of the opinion that instead of filing FIRs of the incident, PTI should press for a Judicial Inquiry into the matter.

Courts always interpret law in its narrow sense and are not supposed to consider elements beyond the written/stipulated law. On the other hand, law is made by the parliamentarians. Adding insult to the injuries, PTI has failed miserably in the parliament to impede the draconian laws enacted by this corrupt regime. So, in the presence of the present law of the land, PTI is on the wrong side, by throwing away the restraining orders of Islamabad High Court.

Conversely speaking, a Judicial Commission works under the Terms of Reference (TORs) set by both the parties (opposition + ruling parties). Therefore, it has a wider range of powers to examine the case under review, which warrants to look into the matter with the perspective of natural law and jurisprudence, rather than an enacted law. So, only in a Judicial Commission, the case can be presented as a matter of freedom of expression. In the court of law, it will only be a case of killing the protestors who were legally prohibited to stage a protest inside the Capital Territory.

Just check out the visuals from South Korean people protesting against their President these days.

 

[Sohail Shuja]

Just check out the visuals from South Korean people protesting against their President these days.

No one was injured. Neither a protester nor an LEA personnel.

BTW, you are talking about a Nation who cleans up the mess in the streets and on the roads by themselves, afterwards a public protest. They think it is their responsibility and don't ask the government to come and do it for them.
Now tell me, how many Pakistanis do that?

Protests against martial law in South Korea

South Korea’s opposition party members gather at South Korea's parliament

www.bbc.com

 

[4PeaceAndJustice]

No one was injured. Neither a protester nor an LEA personnel.

BTW, you are talking about a Nation who cleans up the mess in the streets and on the roads by themselves, afterwards a public protest. They think it is their responsibility and don't ask the government to come and do it for them.
Now tell me, how many Pakistanis do that?

Protests against martial law in South Korea

South Korea’s opposition party members gather at South Korea's parliament

www.bbc.com

You missed the point. The people came out and protested in front of the Parliament. No one was injured because no one put up containers or fire tear gas or rubber bullets or real bullets. No one tried to arrest the protesters on account of section 144. They heard their demands and moved forward. In Pakistan, the situation is much worse due to mass rigging in elections, enforced disappearances, torture on public/politicians/media persons etc. Hence conditions for public reaction in the form of protests are much greater than in Korea.

 

[Sohail Shuja]

You missed the point. The people came out and protested in front of the Parliament. No one was injured because no one put up containers or fire tear gas or rubber bullets or real bullets. No one tried to arrest the protesters on account of section 144.

and you are missing the point that our law of the land was changed recently, banning Islamabad for any sort of public or political demonstrations and that the PTI Ministers were sitting as lame ducks when this law was passed.

you are forgetting another thing that even that draconian law could be challenged in the SC, as being against the basic human rights ensured by our constitution. But all the legal team of PTI never ushered a word against that.

In South Korea, there exists no such law and the matters like this are always considered against the prevailing law of the land.

If the use of alcohol by anyone is allowed in legal terms in many countries, then you cannot use it as a precedence to drink alcohol in Pakistan. If you do it here.... only the law of the land applies. This is also the case in respect of the massacre conducted by the LEAs here as well.

They heard their demands and moved forward.In Pakistan, the situation is much worse due to mass rigging in elections, enforced disappearances, torture on public/politicians/media persons etc. Hence conditions for public reaction in the form of protests are much greater than in Korea.

Now here you are also missing the point that the lawmakers of S. Korea, including those from the party of the President voted against him.

But here, the compromised leadership of PTI never stood against this law. Secondly, the narrative they built was not around the election rigging, enforced disappearances or any other national causes, in which, they might have been enjoined by other parties as well and create a bigger political movement. The narrative of PTI remained only the release of Khan, that is how they were first singled out in this political conundrum.

 

[4PeaceAndJustice]

and you are missing the point that our law of the land was changed recently, banning Islamabad for any sort of public or political demonstrations and that the PTI Ministers were sitting as lame ducks when this law was passed.

you are forgetting another thing that even that draconian law could be challenged in the SC, as being against the basic human rights ensured by our constitution. But all the legal team of PTI never ushered a word against that.

In South Korea, there exists no such law and the matters like this are always considered against the prevailing law of the land.

If the use of alcohol by anyone is allowed in legal terms in many countries, then you cannot use it as a precedence to drink alcohol in Pakistan. If you do it here.... only the law of the land applies. This is also the case in respect of the massacre conducted by the LEAs here as well.


Now here you are also missing the point that the lawmakers of S. Korea, including those from the party of the President voted against him.

But here, the compromised leadership of PTI never stood against this law. Secondly, the narrative they built was not around the election rigging, enforced disappearances or any other national causes, in which, they might have been enjoined by other parties as well and create a bigger political movement. The narrative of PTI remained only the release of Khan, that is how they were first singled out in this political conundrum.

I am sorry but your statement is factually incorrect. There were three demands as described in tweet from Imran Khan which also talks about the illegal treatment meted out to lawmakers through torture and arrests. https://twitter.com/x/status/1859118204569931802
Regarding laws you mentioned, that goes to show that such fascist laws only exist in fascist states like Pakistan and are not the democratic norm in the world. Parliament is the center of power where most such protests happen in democratic countries.