A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, led by Justice Jamal Mandokhel and including Justices Hassan Azhar Rizvi and Musarrat Hilali, voiced disgust with the police and prosecution. Justice Mandokhel questioned whether staging a demonstration or working for a political party was a crime. He stated that the situation was created by limits on student unions and political parties.
“Should a former prime minister be considered a traitor based on the statement of a head constable?” The judge went on to ask.
Justice Rizvi inquired about the evidence against the individuals and whether they were identified from CCTV video. The investigating officer responded that the demonstrators had smashed the cameras at the Hamza camp and other locations.
Justice Mandokhel commented that this implied there was no evidence against the accused, only police testimony, and questioned why the terrorist clauses were introduced to the case.
The Punjab government lawyer said that the suspects had attacked the ISI camp. According to Justice Mandokhel, the lawyer was unfamiliar with the term “terrorism.” “Terrorist attacks took place in the Army Public School Peshawar and the Quetta court,” he said, questioning when such rallies became terrorism.
