The Supreme Court’s decision is in front of everyone: Ali Azad, The accused involved in the incident should be punished to the fullest extent of the law: Qibla Ayaz

By Staff Reporter

ISLAMABAD: Talking in renowned talk show Sachi Baat, in a series of recent discussions, two prominent figures, President of the Supreme Court Bar Association Rauf Atta, and Ali Azad, a self-proclaimed voice of conscience and constitutional interpretation, engaged in a heated exchange on matters of law, politics, and justice in Pakistan. Their conversation also touched upon a tragic incident in Balochistan, drawing in comments from former Chairman of the Council of Islamic Ideology, Qibla Ayaz.

The initial debate revolved around the oath-taking of members elected to reserved seats. Rauf Atta asserted that these members took their oath as per the constitution, emphasizing that the 26th Constitutional Amendment is part of the Constitution and Article 255 allows for taking the oath. He maintained that the Supreme Court’s decision on the matter was in accordance with the constitution and law, and that the Election Commission had fulfilled its constitutional responsibility.

Ali Azad, however, vehemently disagreed. Declaring “My political party is my conscience,” he stated, “I speak according to the constitution, the state is free.” He challenged Rauf Atta, asking, “Where in Article 255 is it written that taking an oath is allowed?” He further posited, “If the 27th Amendment comes, it might allow taking oath,” and insisted that “Whoever goes to the National Assembly must also take the oath in the National Assembly.” Azad expressed cynicism about the judiciary, claiming, “There is no judiciary in the country, the state is independent. The powerful get justice, the poor don’t, the state is free. Now people say, ‘Don’t be a lawyer, be a judge.'” He questioned, “How can anyone else get the seats that PTI did not get?”

Rauf Atta urged Ali Azad to “speak the truth and the right,” reiterating the importance of accepting the Supreme Court’s decision, though acknowledging that “All aspects of the decision can be discussed.” He also pointed out that “All parties participated in the elections” and “Congratulations were given to those who were selected,” concluding that “Nothing is final in politics.” Ali Azad reminisced about a “friendly atmosphere in the 26th Amendment,” suggesting a change in the current political climate.

The discussion then shifted to a more somber topic: the brutal murder of two people in Balochistan, specifically the “Degari incident.” Rauf Atta, as President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, condemned the killings, asking, “why the state remained silent,” and demanded the arrest of “all those involved.” He later confirmed that “11 accused involved in the Degari incident have been arrested.” He also emphasized that “Whoever is involved in the jirga’s decision should be punished,” and squarely placed the blame on the provincial government, stating, “The failure of the provincial government is visible in the Balochistan incident.” He stressed that “Providing justice is the responsibility of the state,” and warned, “If some individuals rise up and start making decisions like this, then the state will cease to exist.”

Ali Azad echoed the sentiment, calling the Degari incident “a tragic incident” and “a failure of the provincial government.” He asserted, “Responsibility for the incident in Balochistan lies with the provincial government,” and demanded that “The provincial government should ensure that the accused involved in the incident are punished.”

Qibla Ayaz, former Chairman of the Council of Islamic Ideology, also weighed in on the Balochistan tragedy, expressing collective shame, stating, “We all bowed our heads in shame over the Balochistan incident.” He strongly advocated for justice, demanding that “The accused involved in the incident should be punished to the fullest extent of the law” and that “The criminals should be identified and punished as soon as possible.” He called for “a full investigation into the Balochistan incident,” stressing that “Whoever is involved in this incident should be punished according to the law.” Ayaz further elaborated on the legal and religious principles, stating, “Some people have taken the law into their own hands in the Balochistan incident. Sharia law has given the power of punishment only to the state. No individual can be allowed to take the constitution into their own hands. Whoever is involved in this incident should be punished according to the law.”