![](https://nextpakistan.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/5c95caa4268ac.jpg)
- May 12, 2024
- Kainat Shakeel
- 0
ISLAMABAD: The special commission’s report on the 20-day sit-in in 2017 at Faizabad has drawn criticism from the Supreme Court, which characterizes it as “replete with clichés, platitudes, and homilies, often as a substitute for substance.” The commission’s report did not address the Terms of Reference (ToR), and it was mistakenly presumed that it was against the law to travel to Islamabad and protest, according to a three-page order issued by the Supreme Court on Saturday. The court found the report biased as it had overlooked some of the court’s subsequent orders and verdicts.
The commission’s findings drew criticism for condemning high-ranking officials while letting violent offenders off the hook. The Supreme Court pointed out that the report’s bias towards one person’s statement without justification over another’s testimony compromised the commission’s objectivity. Mansoor Usman Awan, the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP), responded that the government would issue a statement when asked if the federal government approved the report. He did, however, express the judgment that the report was devoid of substance and did not adequately address the ToRs.
The SC gave the AGP directions on how to present the government’s answer and get permission to release the commission’s report to the public. Along with directing the commission members and chairman to react in writing to the initial observations, the court also allowed them to attend the following hearing date to provide further in-person comments. The commission’s disregard for these important details was brought to light by the SC order, casting doubt on the report’s objectivity and reliability.
Under the terms of the ToRs, the commission was mandated to investigate any unlawful financial or other support given to Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan to carry out the Faizabad dharna, suggest measures for dealing with individuals who issued decrees or fatwas, look into Pemra’s inaction against broadcasters and cable operators, investigate the spread of hate speech and violent acts via social media, identify legal violations and their corresponding culpability, and suggest strategies for managing protests, rallies, and sit-ins.