A five-member Constitutional Bench (CB) of the Supreme Court on Thursday referred a plea against the detention of Baloch Yakjehti Committee chief Mahrang Baloch to the Practice and Procedure Committee, which forms benches and fixes cases under the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023.
The plea, filed by Mahrang’s sister Nadia Baloch through senior counsel Faisal Siddiqi, urges the SC to set aside an April 15 order of the Balochistan High Court that rejected a petition against Mahrang’s detention under the Maintenance of Public Order— a law that empowers authorities to arrest and detain individuals suspected of posing a threat to public order initially for a period of 30 days. Mahrang is currently detained at the Hudda District Prison in Quetta on charges of attacking Quetta Civil Hospital and inciting people to violence.
The plea filed by her sister in June was taken up by the CB today, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan and comprised Justices Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi Shakeel Ahmad.
During the hearing, Nadia’s counsel Siddiqui argued that “this case should be fixed before a regular bench and not a constitutional bench”.
At this, Justice Mazhar said, “Since you have challenged the MPO, that makes this a case for the Constitutional Bench”.
Siddiqi responded: “I did not ask for an interpretation of the law in the appeal; we have only challenged the MPO order.”
Subsequently, the court referred the case to the Practice and Procedure Committee.
Appeal
Mahrang, whose advocacy group has been working against enforced disappearances since 2018, has been in detention since March 22.
Nadia had initially filed a petition in the BHC against her sister’s detention. However, in its April 15 order, the BHC disposed of the application and directed the petitioner to approach the Balochistan Home Department.
Subsequently, Nadia approached the SC.
The federal government through interior ministry, home and tribal affairs department of Balochistan, prosecutor general, inspector general of police, Federal Investigation Agency director general, Quetta deputy commissioner and the state were named as respondents in her petition filed in the SC.
The plea contended that the April 15 BHC order was contrary to the Constitution, law and facts.
The petition alleged that Mahrang’s repeated unlawful detention and labelling her as a sympathiser of militants was a planned effort by the respondents to stop her from raising her voice for missing persons.
It stated that Mahrang’s father and brother, too, were subjected to enforced disappearance in 2011 and 2017.
The appeal further said that in December 2023, the “Baloch Long March”, organised and led by the detainee and other members of the BYC, was allegedly met with excessive and unlawful force.
The petition alleged that following a militant attack on a passenger train on March 11, there was a marked escalation in retaliatory measures by the state. On March 20, Bebarg Zehri, a BYC central committee member and his brother were abducted from their residence, the petition alleged, adding on March 19, their relative Saeeda Baloch was arrested and unlawfully detained for two days without any formal charge.
The appeal contended that the BHC erred by not ensuring the production of all the relevant material before it on which Balochistan MPO was passed so that the high court could have satisfied itself regarding reasonableness, arbitrariness and legality of the MPO.
It recalled that the SC held in 2003 that it was incumbent upon the detaining authority to place entire material before court on which basis the detention order was passed, regardless of any claim of privilege related to any document, as the high court was competent to decide the same and satisfy itself regarding the existence of the requisite condition of MPO of the detaining authority.
The petition further contended that the balance of convenience was in favour of the petitioner and irreparable loss would be caused to the petitioner unless the operation of the high court order was not suspended during the pendency of the present case.
The petitioner asserted that the deputy commissioner, by issuing the MPO order, acted in clear excess of his statutory mandate, since it was issued unilaterally by him without securing the requisite approval from the chief minister.
BYC leaders’ detention
Mahrang and other BYC leaders, including Sibghatullah Baloch, Beebow Baloch, Beebarg Baloch and Gulzadi Baloch, were arrested under the MPO in March and have remained in custody since, having been remanded multiple times.
They were initially taken into custody for a period of 30 days. Thereafter, their detention was extended for an additional 30 days (second term) through a decision of the Balochistan Home Department in April.
After the BYC leaders had completed three months in custody in June, the provincial government issued a fourth extension order for their detention.
Following their detention under the MPO, cases were also registered against Mahrang and other BYC leaders under different sections of the Anti-Terrorism Act and the Pakistan Penal Code.
