PHC Sends Afridi Detention Petitions to Larger Bench
The Peshawar High Court on Tuesday sent the Afridi detention petitions to the chief justice for the formation of a larger bench. The petitions concern the whereabouts of Sohail Afridi, the non-functional Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa chief minister, Provincial Assembly Speaker Babar Saleem Swati, and MNA Junaid Akbar, among others.
A two-member bench of Justice Syed Arshad Ali and Justice Muhammad Faheem Wali heard the cases in Peshawar. The judges said the matter should go to the chief justice, who should constitute a larger bench. Advocate General Sanaullah told the court that a larger bench was also the government’s request.
The decision moves a politically charged case to a bigger forum. A larger bench is normally formed when a case raises questions that go beyond one petition, or when the court wants a wider panel to settle an issue of public importance. In this case, the petitions touch on detention, protective custody, and the powers of the provincial assembly, so a larger bench gives the ruling added weight.
Afridi detention petitions: what the court heard
Petitioners’ counsel Advocate Bashir Khan Wazir told the court that Afridi and Swati had been missing for several days. He said the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa governor and advisers had confirmed that the chief minister, the speaker, and Junaid Akbar were in protective custody.
Wazir also told the court that the provincial assembly had passed an immunity bill covering the speaker and members of the assembly. He argued that, under that bill, the chief minister, the speaker, and other members could not be arrested.
Justice Ali noted the standing of the people involved. He said this was the province’s chief minister and speaker, and that these were not ordinary personalities. He added that the case was not a simple Section 3 case under the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, known as MPO-3. He said, in plain terms, that the province’s chief minister was missing.
The advocate general asked for more time to file a report. He said the report had been sought from the police, law enforcement agencies, and the Home Department. He also noted that there were more than 200 cases under MPO-3, which shows how wide the detention issue has become in the province.
Justice Ali pushed back on the delay. He said the advocate general had been given 10 days by the court and was not complying with its orders. Petitioners’ counsel Yasir Khattak argued that the court had ordered the de-sealing of the deputy speaker’s house, and that authorities had still not carried out that order. He said officials were committing contempt of court.
Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Bar Council member Advocate Farooq Ahmed Khattak added a direct challenge. He said that if the officials had been picked up under MPO-3, the authorities should tell the court so.
Why a larger bench matters for this case
The background to the petitions goes back to October 13, when Afridi’s brother moved the high court seeking his immediate recovery. That petition argued that Afridi’s alleged abduction and continued detention violated his fundamental rights, and it asked for an independent judicial inquiry into his disappearance.
The petition was filed amid uncertainty over Afridi’s whereabouts after the imposition of emergency and governor’s rule in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa on October 11. That step brought the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf led provincial government to an end and transferred its powers to Governor Faisal Karim Kundi.
Feature Pakistan earlier reported that the high court had sought replies from the governor and the speaker in a related challenge to governor’s rule: PHC Seeks Replies From Governor, Speaker. The new order takes the detention petitions a step further, by placing them before a larger bench rather than leaving them with the two-member panel.
Gohar welcomes the order and calls for talks
PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan welcomed the court’s decision outside the high court. He said it was strange logic that the chief minister and speaker were missing, and he thanked the court for referring the matter to the chief justice.
Gohar said decisions should be equal for everyone. He added that political tension should not escalate further, and that political matters should be resolved by sitting down and finding a solution. He said an offer of talks was present on the table, and that talks should be held with seriousness and good faith.
The bench decision follows other court developments, including Imaan Hadi ATC bail in a road blockade case, ATC bail for four PTI leaders, and the ruling that civil servant private conduct can be misconduct.
Frequently asked questions
What did the Peshawar High Court decide about the Afridi detention petitions?
The court said a larger bench should hear the petitions, and it sent the cases to the chief justice to constitute that bench.
Who are the petitions about?
The petitions concern Sohail Afridi, the non-functional Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa chief minister, Provincial Assembly Speaker Babar Saleem Swati, and MNA Junaid Akbar, among others.
What did the petitioners argue in court?
They said Afridi and Swati had been missing for several days, and they pointed to the provincial assembly’s immunity bill, arguing that the chief minister, speaker, and members could not be arrested.
What is the difference between protective custody and MPO-3 detention?
Protective custody is presented as a safety measure, while detention under Section 3 of the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance is a formal legal order, and the court will need to decide which description fits the facts.
What happens next in the case?
The chief justice will form the larger bench, and the government is expected to file a report from the police, law enforcement agencies, and the Home Department.
