Political Parties, Public Office Holders Cannot Block Islamabad Roads: High Court
By Mian Nadeem | Published September 14, 2026 | 02:18 PM
The Islamabad High Court has disposed of a petition against the PTI long march after directing provincial chief ministers to ensure that state machinery is not employed in political protests.
ISLAMABAD, (UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News – 14th Sep, 2026) The Islamabad High Court has taken a decisive stand on political gatherings and protests. In its recent judgment, the court ruled that no political party or public office holder can block roads in Islamabad.
Key Points:
- A three-member bench led by Chief Justice Sarfraz Dogar issued directives to this effect.
- The court emphasized that provincial chief ministers must ensure state machinery is not utilized for political protests.
- Any government official facing pressure to participate in a protest should inform their provincial chief secretary, chief commissioner, or inspector general immediately.
- It also prohibited government officials from allowing subordinates to join marches or protests heading towards Islamabad.
Background of the Case:
The case was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice Sarfraz Dogar, Justice Azam Khan, and Justice Asif. The Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan, Islamabad Advocate General Naveed Malik (prosecutor general), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Secretary Shahab Ali Shah, and the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Inspector General were also present.
The court was provided with video evidence of PTI protests in 2022 and 2024, highlighting the use of state machinery during these events. Islamabad Advocate General Naveed Malik argued that the 2022 protest involved the destruction of property at D-Chowk after it was set on fire, and similar violence occurred in 2024. He cited PTI leaders’ provocative statements, suggesting they did not intend a peaceful gathering.
Malik further emphasized two main objectives of the long march: the release of a prisoner and the removal of the government, both of which he deemed unconstitutional. He stressed the need for protest permits from magistrates and suggested that administrative arrangements could be made, but force should never be used against citizens.
The petitioner’s counsel, however, presented a counterargument, focusing on the role of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in the long march.
