The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has issued a clear directive to the district administration, urging them to refrain from harassing students in connection with the installation of M-Tags on motorcycles. This development came during a hearing on Monday, where the court emphasized the need to balance security measures with the rights and convenience of students who rely heavily on motorcycles for daily transportation.
Chief Justice Sardar Mohammad Sarfraz Dogar presided over the proceedings and expressed concern about the challenges students face due to the new M-Tag policy. Reflecting on his own experiences, the Chief Justice remarked that during his student days, concessions were provided to ease financial and logistical burdens. He questioned the rationale behind imposing the M-Tag requirement on motorcycles, highlighting the potential difficulties it creates for young commuters.
In response, the state’s legal representative, Abdul Rehman, explained that the government’s decision to implement the M-Tag system was driven by pressing security considerations. He cited the tragic Kutchery blast, which resulted in the loss of 12 lives and left 36 individuals seriously injured. The attack involved a motorcycle that was used to reach the targeted location via Bikya, prompting authorities to adopt stricter security protocols to prevent similar incidents in the future.
The Chief Justice acknowledged the importance of safeguarding public safety but stressed that the district administration must ensure that these security measures do not translate into undue hardship for citizens, especially students. He urged the authorities to find a balanced approach that provides necessary protection without resorting to harassment or excessive enforcement tactics against the affected individuals.
Following these discussions, the court instructed the state lawyer to submit a detailed response addressing the concerns raised during the hearing. The next session of the case has been scheduled for April 6, 2026, allowing time for further examination of the issue and potential adjustments to the implementation strategy. This case highlights the ongoing tension between maintaining security and preserving the everyday freedoms of the public, particularly vulnerable groups like students.
