The Supreme Court has issued a contempt of court notice to Luqman Ali Afzal, the owner of Monal Restaurant, in connection with an alleged campaign against the judiciary.
Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa questioned why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against Afzal for his actions, highlighting the gravity of the situation.
The notice was issued during a hearing concerning commercial activities within Margalla Hills National Park. Chief Justice Isa also expressed frustration with the Secretary Cabinet and the Chairman of the Capital Development Authority (CDA), warning them of potential contempt proceedings due to their handling of ongoing issues.
Chief Justice Isa emphasized that while criticism of judicial decisions is permissible, spreading false propaganda and issuing death threats under the guise of freedom of expression is unacceptable.
During the hearing, the Chief Justice referenced a separate case involving the return of £190 million to an individual rather than the Pakistani people, as was originally intended by the British government. This raised concerns about misuse of authority and a lack of accountability.
Secretary Cabinet Kamran Ali Afzal informed the court that the Wildlife Department had been transferred to the Ministry of Interior following a recommendation by the Prime Minister. This move prompted Chief Justice Isa’s anger, who suggested that the Cabinet Secretary might be trying to protect his brother at the expense of the Prime Minister. He warned that failing to be truthful could lead to serious consequences.
The court also criticized the CDA for its inaction regarding advertisements for private housing societies on Margalla Hills, with Chief Justice Isa questioning why no measures were taken until the situation became critical.
The ongoing controversy surrounding Margalla Hills implicates the Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Climate Change, and CDA. Justice Isa questioned the Attorney General about the rationale behind transferring the Wildlife Department to the Ministry of Interior, implying that it might have been motivated by the desire to control valuable land. The Attorney General responded that the government had since rescinded the notification.
The Supreme Court reiterated its demand for Luqman Ali Afzal to explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him. Additionally, the court urged the Prime Minister’s Office to assess whether its advice to transfer the Wildlife Board to the Ministry of Interior was genuinely in the public interest or driven by personal agendas.
