The Peshawar High Court (PHC) has put off its ruling on petitions challenging governor’s rule and an emergency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP). The court heard the case on Tuesday, when petitioners’ lawyers argued that both measures were driven by politics rather than security concerns. The petitions question the legal basis for both steps.
A two-member bench, made up of Justice Ijaz Anwar and Justice Faheem Wali, heard the pleas. Last week, the National Assembly and the Senate passed resolutions backing the emergency in KP by majority vote. The debate over the resolutions touched on the province’s security situation, political negotiations and a federal government decision. The National Assembly then adjourned until 11am on Friday.
Law minister defends KP emergency as Bilawal urges talks
During the parliamentary debate, Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar defended the emergency. He described it as a constitutional response to worsening security conditions in the province. Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari took a different line. He called for renewed political engagement between the federal government and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), and urged both sides to return to the negotiating table.
Petitioners dispute legal grounds for emergency and governor’s rule
The petitioners’ counsel argued that an emergency can only be imposed in the event of war or external aggression. In their view, neither existed in the province. They said the provincial government already had the power to act against terrorism. They also asked why an emergency had not been imposed when militant violence was at its height.
The lawyers further contended that Article 234 of the Constitution can be invoked only when a provincial government is unable to function. According to them, the provincial assembly and government had been working normally, and no constitutional breakdown had occurred to justify governor’s rule.
PTI leaders allege political motives behind KP measures
Speaking outside the court, PTI lawyer Salman Akram Raja said parliamentary approval is required for an emergency or governor’s rule. He added that the chief minister’s authority could not simply be taken away under either arrangement. Barrister Sameer Khosa alleged that governor’s rule was imposed solely for political reasons. He also claimed that the chief minister and the speaker were taken into custody unlawfully after it was imposed. If the goal was to fight terrorism, Khosa said, action should target that goal rather than a particular political party.
PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan said the party had challenged both measures and asked for a larger bench. He said the court had given the petitioners 10 days, and expressed hope that justice would be done. Khan maintained that the provincial government had received its mandate from the people. He questioned why similar steps had not been taken in Balochistan, where he claimed terrorism was more severe. He also raised questions about the reported detention of Aleema Khan, the removal of PTI election symbols and the arrests of the party’s provincial lawmakers.
Senate Opposition Leader Allama Raja Nasir Abbas said KP should be run by its own government and people, as is the case in Balochistan. He alleged that the province appeared to have been placed under Punjab’s control, and that its traditions and political norms had been ignored.
