Staff Report
ISLAMABAD: The Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Qazi Faez Isa has raised concerns over potential “gangsterism” influencing decisions within Parliament, the judiciary, and media.
His remarks came during a Supreme Court hearing related to residential activities in the Margalla Hills National Park. The court reviewed a contempt of court case involving private restaurant owner Luqman Ali Afzal and rescinded the contempt notice.
The Chief Justice directed the Islamabad High Court to investigate the judge responsible for issuing a stay order against demolition of illegal structures in the park. “How can a civil judge halt the Supreme Court’s orders?” the Chief Justice queried, suggesting that such actions warrant serious repercussions.
He noted that a stay order was granted despite the absence of court fees, making the case inadmissible.
Luqman Ali Afzal’s legal representative stated that the restaurant’s premises had been vacated, and the stay order was withdrawn on October 2.
The Chief Justice emphasised that both the executive and judiciary must adhere to the Supreme Court’s directives.
He questioned if any concerns regarding commercial activities in Margalla Hills had been raised in Parliament or the media, highlighting a trend of targeting judges instead of addressing judicial orders.
The hearing also addressed the legality of the North Range Housing Society within the national park.
The court has issued notices to the Capital Development Authority (CDA) and Chief Commissioner, requesting ownership documents and building approval details.
The session has been adjourned for one week as the court continues to scrutinise these complex issues involving land use and regulatory compliance.
The Supreme Court of Pakistan has dismissed review petitions challenging its decision to remove Monal, La Montana, Gloria Jeans, and other restaurants operating within the National Park area, upholding its earlier ruling.
In a brief judgement, the court maintained that the restaurants had voluntarily agreed to cease operations within three months.
It criticised the filing of review petitions as “disrespectful,” stressing that honouring the commitment to close the establishments was essential.
The Supreme Court had previously ordered the Capital Development Authority (CDA) to prioritise these restaurants for lease in alternative locations.
However, the court has now withdrawn this observation, removing any preferential treatment for new leases.
The ruling further emphasised that the court’s decisions must be followed exactly as outlined, without any deviations.
