During a recent hearing at the Islamabad High Court (IHC), senior puisne judge Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani expressed concern over the alleged involvement of intelligence agencies in forced abductions. The judge’s remarks came in response to a petition seeking the recovery of Kashmiri poet Ahmed Farhad Shah, who was reportedly abducted from his home. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan had urged authorities to ensure Shah’s immediate release.
In the hearing, Justice Kayani ordered the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Jameel Zafar, to make all possible efforts to retrieve Shah, warning that he would summon the defence secretary if necessary. Furthermore, the judge directed the Ministry of Defense to provide a clear explanation of the circumstances surrounding Shah’s disappearance and instructed SSP Zafar to investigate the allegations against the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
However, during the hearing, a defence ministry official informed the court that Shah was not in the custody of the ISI. Justice Kayani emphasized the need to change public perceptions regarding government institutions and stressed the importance of addressing the issue of forced abductions.
The judge’s strong stance prompted criticism from Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar, who disapproved of the judiciary’s remarks and called for a more restrained approach. The law minister argued that the courts should adhere to legal processes and avoid making sensationalized statements that could lead to further unrest.
In response to the criticism, Justice Kayani reaffirmed his commitment to addressing the issue of forced abductions and emphasized the need for accountability. The judge underscored the importance of upholding the rule of law and ensuring that government institutions act within their legal mandate.
The ongoing legal proceedings and the exchange of views between the judiciary and the executive branch highlight the complexity of addressing issues related to alleged forced abductions and the role of intelligence agencies in Pakistan. The case underscores the delicate balance between upholding the rule of law and addressing concerns about human rights abuses and extrajudicial actions.
