Peshawar [Pakistan], February 5 (ANI): The Peshawar High Court has upheld the federal government’s 2024 decision to proscribe the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) and several leaders, including chief Manzoor Ahmad Pashteen, Dawn reported.
A bench of Justice Sahibzada Asadullah and Justice Khurshid Iqbal issued a short order rejecting two petitions that challenged the proscription under the Anti-Terrorism Act. The court reserved a detailed judgment on January 21 and said the full reasons would be released later.
One petition, filed jointly by Manzoor Ahmad Pashteen and nine other leaders, sought to declare the ban under Section 11B and their inclusion under Section 11-EE illegal, and asked for PTM’s removal from the First Schedule and their names from the Fourth Schedule. The petitioners argued the 2014 amendments to Sections 11-B and 11-EE violated Article 10-A of the Constitution by allowing proscription without fair trial or due process, and they sought to make Section 11-D (placing organisations under observation) a mandatory precursor to proscription.
A separate petition by PTM member Masoom Shah challenged the Interior Ministry’s October 6, 2024 notification proscribing the movement. That ban came days before the Pashtun National Jirga held in Jamrud, Khyber, from October 11–13, 2024.
During hearings, Additional Attorney General Sanaullah argued the petitions were not maintainable and pointed to statutory remedies under Section 11-C of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, saying petitioners should first seek review from the Interior Ministry and then approach the high court if denied. He alleged PTM leaders engaged in anti-state activities via hate speeches and questioned why the movement had not registered with the Election Commission if it claimed political status. He also submitted a sealed report containing sensitive material to the court.
Petitioners’ lawyers — including Attaullah Kundi, Jehanzeb Mehsud and Shah Mohammad — said PTM is a civil, non-violent social movement advocating Pashtun rights since 2014, inspired by non-violent leader Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, and consistently opposed to violence. Lead counsel Attaullah Kundi argued the 2014 amendments permit bans without hearings, violating natural justice and Article 10-A and rendering Sections 11B and 11EE unconstitutional under Article 8. He said the government issued the October 6 notification without disclosing cabinet decisions or the grounds for proscription and that PTM, as a movement rather than a political party, did not need Election Commission registration. Despite repeated requests, the petitioners said the government provided no information on the basis for the ban. (ANI)
(This content is from a syndicated feed and is published as received. The Tribune assumes no responsibility for its accuracy or completeness.)
