PHC to hear petitions against governor's rule, emergency in KP on Oct 20

The Peshawar High Court (PHC) has admitted for hearing two petitions challenging the imposition of governor’s rule and an emergency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, with hearing scheduled for October 20.

The petitions were filed separately by PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan and advocate Salman Khan, naming the Federation of Pakistan, the president, the prime minister, the KP governor and other federal and provincial authorities as respondents.

The petitioners argued that using terrorism as a justification for action against the elected provincial government amounted to discriminatory treatment. They pointed out that governor’s rule had not been imposed in Balochistan despite terrorist attacks and loss of life there.

They further contended that governor’s rule had not been imposed in KP despite terrorism between 2007 and 2015, and alleged that the PTI-led provincial government was being targeted under the pretext of counterterrorism.

The petitions stated that the PTI supported action against terrorism and efforts to restore peace, while allegations that it had failed to take effective measures against militancy were being used to increase political pressure.

The petitioners maintained that the federal government could not strip an elected provincial government of its powers on the basis of political differences.

They also argued that the PTI had secured a two-thirds majority in KP in the 2024 general elections and that any imposition of governor’s rule must comply with the constitutional requirements and procedure laid down in Article 234.

Similarly, they said, the imposition of an emergency must be examined in accordance with Article 232 and the relevant parliamentary requirements.

The petitions further alleged that the failure of negotiations was being used as a pretext to target the PTI. They maintained that no unlawful action had been planned during the long march and questioned the suspension of an elected government by portraying constitutional and democratic protest as a threat to public order.

The petitioners described the imposition of governor’s rule and an emergency in KP as unconstitutional, illegal and mala fide, arguing that the measures violated fundamental rights and undermined the democratic mandate of the people.

They asked the high court to declare the measures unlawful and set them aside, and to suspend the notification imposing governor’s rule until a final decision on the petitions.