ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Friday disposed of petitions calling for the establishment of judicial commission to investigate the murder of journalist Arshad Sharif, ruling that the matter was already sub judice before the Supreme Court.

Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas delivered the judgment on three consolidated petitions filed by journalist Hamid Mir, the Judicial Activism Panel, and Sharif’s widow, Javeria Siddique.

The petitioners sought a federal government-initiated judicial commission for a “transparent inquiry” into the circumstances surrounding Sharif’s departure from Pakistan, his stay in Dubai, and his murder in Kenya in October 2022.

They argued that the current investigation by a Special Joint Investigation Team (SJIT) was flawed and violated constitutional rights to a fair trial and due process.

Deputy attorney general, representing the state, countered, stating that the Supreme Court was actively supervising the case following its suo motu intervention.

He stressed that procedural actions have been completed, including FIR registration and submitting charges to the trial court, alongside securing a Mutual Legal Assistance agreement with Kenya to facilitate the investigation.

After a review, Justice Minhas recalled the apex court’s intervention, with a five-member bench initiating oversight in December 2022 to guarantee an independent and impartial investigation.

He highlighted that the creation of the SJIT was under the Supreme Court’s directive, with continuous oversight from the apex court.

“The matter concerning the tragic murder of the journalist Arshad Sharif is presently sub judice before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan,” Justice Minhas stated in the written order. “Consequently, this Court is restrained from issuing any directive … as doing so would encroach upon the apex Court’s jurisdiction.”

While dismissing the petitions, the court granted the petitioners partial relief. It ordered the federal government and the SJIT to keep the petitioners “duly informed regarding all developments in the ongoing investigation”.

The court also directed the state to provide the petitioners with copies of all reports and findings and to apprise them of future progress.

The ruling concluded that the petitioners were “not without remedy” and could bring their concerns directly to the Supreme Court.

Published in Dawn, August 30th, 2025