PTI Challenges Sindh Government Orders to Detain More Than 40 Party Activists
The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has approached the Sindh High Court (SHC), challenging two provincial home department orders seeking the arrest and preventive detention of more than 40 party leaders and workers under the Maintenance of Public Order (MPO) Ordinance.
The petition was filed on Wednesday by PTI Sindh Senior Vice President Shujaat Ali Khan, who asked the court to declare the orders unconstitutional, illegal and without legal effect.
According to the petition, the orders were issued on October 12 and 13, covering 15 and 26 PTI leaders and workers, respectively. Those named reportedly include former member of the National Assembly Alamgir Khan.
The petitioner stated that the directives authorised the arrest of the individuals concerned and their detention for 30 days from the date of arrest, with custody to be placed under the senior superintendent of Central Prison.
The petition names the Sindh chief secretary, home secretary, inspector general of police and other officials as respondents. It argues that the orders threaten the fundamental rights and liberty of the people listed, despite the arrests and detentions not yet having been carried out.
PTI has alleged that the measures are politically motivated and intended to restrict opposition activities rather than address a genuine public-order concern. These claims are part of the party’s petition and have yet to be established by the court.
PTI Questions Legal Basis for Preventive Detention
The party’s counsel, Ali Tahir, argued that the orders lacked specific intelligence reports, details of individual conduct or concrete evidence to justify preventive detention. He said they relied on general allegations that the individuals might encourage people to block roads and highways or organise sit-ins.
The lawyer also referred to Sindh High Court judgments issued in 2023 in similar cases, arguing that general references to public order were insufficient without specific information and individual assessments.
According to the petition, previous court rulings had also questioned the authority of the provincial home secretary or chief secretary to issue detention orders under Section 3(1) of the MPO Ordinance without a valid decision by the provincial cabinet.
The petitioner claimed that the latest orders did not disclose any cabinet approval or decision authorising the action.
The petition further questioned why the two orders used substantially similar reasoning despite naming different individuals. It argued that the approach suggested the authorities had not properly assessed each person’s circumstances.
The PTI has asked the high court to summon the relevant police and departmental records and declare both orders, along with any actions taken under them, unlawful and of no legal effect.
The court’s decision on the petition was not included in the available report.
