ISLAMABAD: A division bench of the Islam­abad High Court (IHC) on Thursday suspended imp­le­mentation of an earlier decision by a single-member bench, ordering the for­mation of an inquiry commission to investigate misuse of the blasphemy law.

The division bench, comprising Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro and Justice Mohammad Azam Khan, issued the stay order after hearing preliminary arguments on appeals challenging the single bench’s ruling.

Senior lawyers Kamran Murtaza, Adil Aziz Qazi, and others appeared on behalf of the petitioners.

During the hearing, Justice Soomro questioned how the petitioners were directly affected by the order. Advocate Kamran Murtaza argued that the petitioners were not granted a full right to a hearing and raised concerns over jurisdiction, noting that the matter involved around 400 cases, some beyond the IHC’s jurisdiction.

He also questioned the legal authority of the court to form such a commission, arguing it rested solely with the federal government.

Mr Murtaza further claimed that the case had initially been disposed of, but the written verdict later stated it would remain pending — a contradiction. He also challenged the admissibility of a writ petition filed by a third party, questioning how such petitioners could be considered aggrieved parties.

Justice Azam Khan asked whether a case could legally remain pending after a final order had been issued. The petitioners’ counsel argued that it could not.

Following the initial hearing, the court reserved its judgement on the maintainability of the appeal, but suspended the single bench’s order for 30 days. The bench also directed the counsels to verify the contents of the original order from the court reader.

The suspended single-bench order was part of a nine-page detailed judgement authored by Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, following 42 hearings in a blasphemy-related case.

The court had directed the federal government to establish an inquiry commission within 30 days, citing widespread concerns over alleged entrapment, custodial deaths, and grave investigative lapses.

The judgement noted that nearly 400 FIRs and around 700 accused were linked to online blasphemy cases, many alleging entrapment by a mysterious individual named “Imaan” — later identified as Komal — who has since disappeared.

The court underscored the need to investigate claims of a blasphemy gang, which is allegedly linked to a so-called NGO with dubious legal status.

The IHC also expressed concern over the Federal Investigation Agency’s (FIA) failure to conduct proper forensic analysis and procedural irregularities, including private arrests, unverified digital evidence, and the same Facebook IDs being reused in multiple FIRs.

The court observed that some FIRs were registered and investigated on the same day, violating FIA’s own SOPs.

Most alarming were the reports of four custodial deaths of blasphemy suspects, with one video showing signs of torture, and no judicial or administrative inquiry conducted in these cases.

Concluding that the issue was of “definite public interest,” the court had justified the formation of a commission as necessary to ensure transparency, accountability, and the protection of fundamental rights.

Published in Dawn, July 25th, 2025