Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa publicly acknowledged the existence of “concrete cases of missing persons” in the country. This acknowledgment transpired during a crucial Supreme Court hearing, prompted by multiple petitions, including one from prominent lawyer Aitzaz Ahsan, focusing on missing persons and enforced disappearances.
The three-member Supreme Court bench, comprising CJP Isa, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, and Justice Musrat Hilali, is overseeing the case. Currently, families of Baloch missing persons are staging a sit-in in Islamabad, following their month-long march from Balochistan’s Turbat.
CJP Isa, in a scathing critique during the hearing, denounced “private armies” in the country, branding them as “illegal.” Emphasizing the citizens’ right to peaceful demonstrations, especially in protest against the disappearances of their loved ones, he stated, “If we solve it together, the problem of missing persons will be resolved.”
The hearing was adjourned until the next day (Wednesday), with CJP Isa ensuring the court’s commitment to addressing the missing persons issue. Additionally, the Chief Justice summoned Attorney General for Pakistan, Mansoor Usman Awan, for the next hearing.
Highlighting the issue of people disappearing after joining certain organizations, CJP Isa pointed at anti-state entities within the country, urging an end to the tradition of joining such organizations. He stressed that the situation in Pakistan is unparalleled globally and called for collective responsibility from all parties.
During the proceedings, CJP Isa addressed the political nature of the petitions filed by Aitzaz Ahsan, asserting that they reflected a political inclination, especially as those named “disappeared” were all politicians from a particular party. While acknowledging their influence, he encouraged influential figures to come forward if there were concerns.
In response to a plea from Khushdil Khan Malik, representing a petitioner of missing persons, for legislation on enforced disappearances, CJP Isa questioned the court’s authority to order Parliament to enact specific legislation, emphasizing the need for institutions to stay within their limits.
