Lawyers slam 'false flag' Pahalgam incident
Lawyers take to the streets to protest against 26th Amendment and Peca Act in Lahore. PHOTO: PPI
Senior members of the legal community have condemned the Pahalgam incident in India as a false flag operation allegedly orchestrated by the Indian intelligence agency, RAW. They called on the United Nations, the UN Security Council, and the Islamic Ummah to dispatch a fact-finding mission to investigate the matter.
They further stated that by suspending the Indus Waters Treaty and blocking water flow, India has effectively initiated a state of war.
Practical training of lawyers for the rescue operations has also been started.
These views were expressed by Advocate Supreme Court Shahzeb Khan, Founder Chairman PTI's lawyer Faisal Malik, Waheed Naz Janjua, Kaneez Fatima Chaudhry, Syeda SB Maria, Rukhsana Yousaf, Rahat Saleem, Arshad Mahmood Janjua, Muhammad Hammad Afzal, Raja Usman Ali and Jahangir Ali Zeb Advocates while talking to The Express Tribune.
These senior lawyers said that Pakistanis are a peace-loving nation. India should not consider our nobility and peace-loving attitude as cowardice. If India started a war, India would get a stronger response than that of February 2019.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
2 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Military notes of Indo-Pak conflict — the rundown
The writer is a retired major general and has an interest in International Relations and Political Sociology. He can be reached at tayyarinam@ and tweets @20_Inam During the last two weeks, in this series, we discussed the perceptual aspects of the recent Indo-Pak standoff, India's doctrinal collapse, the redefined deterrence and the 'Exterior' and 'Interior Maneuvers' by both sides, before and during the hostilities. We continue the debate… This was the first time that India under its supposed 'new normal' used 'cruise' missiles, both the BrahMos version (PJ-10 co-developed with Russia) as well as the European SCALP-EG targeting Pakistan proper. Pakistan also retaliated for the first time, employing its conventionally armed short-range Fatah-I and Fatah-II series of 'ballistic' missiles and other types. This was also the first time that RPVs (drones) were used with the intent of causing damage to the other side, in addition to reconnaissance and intelligence-collection roles. This was also the first time that strategic instability in South Asia was linked internationally to the unresolved Jammu and Kashmir dispute and not terrorism per se. Let us quickly recapture the timelines from April 22 to May 22, 2025. In run up to the crisis, on April 22, five militants killed 26 civilian tourists in Pahalgam, Jammu & Kashmir, including one Nepali national, leading to Indian finger pointing towards Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) groups. On April 23, India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty, closed Attari–Wagah border crossing, expelled Pakistan's military diplomats, reduced Pakistan's diplomatic staff and cancelled SAARC visas for Pakistani nationals. From April 23–30 border skirmishes took place. On April 24, Pakistan condemned the Pahalgam attack and termed India's response as 'unilateral'; and retaliated by cancelling Indian visas, evacuating Indian nationals, closing its airspace to Indian aircraft, halting all trade and warning India against diverting Indus water, calling it an act of war. On April 25, India initiated ceasefire violations across the LoC. National Security Committee (NSC) met in Pakistan on April 26. Iran stepped forward with an offer to mediate. And on April 30, India banned its airspace to Pakistan, and IAF intruded into Pakistani airspace. Escalation and military preparations took place during May 1–6. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, after some initial ambivalence, 'expected' to speak with both foreign ministers on May 1. On May 3, Pakistan successfully test-fired its short-range Abdali ballistic missile. India escalated by cutting off all mail and trade links with Pakistan, banning Pakistani vessels from its ports and warned Pakistani ships against entering the Indian waters. On May 4, India stopped downflow from Baglihar dam on River Chenab. On May 6, Pakistan shot down 29 Indian drones near the LoC and in Punjab. And Iran's FM visited Pakistan proposing mediation. In the military operations (May 7–10), India launched 'Operation Sindoor', on May 7, conducting missile strikes on nine sites in Pakistan (Bahawalpur, Muridke, Gulpur, Bhimber, Chak Amru, Bagh, Kotli, Sialkot and Muzaffarabad). On May 10, IAF attacked eight major Pakistani air bases, including Nur Khan base in Rawalpindi. Pakistan, early on May 10, retaliated with Operation 'Bunyan-un-Marsoos', launching missile and drone combo on 26 military targets across India, and in the Indian-occupied Kashmir. It also launched another wave of swarm drones, loitering munitions and Fatah missiles targeting 26 locations along India's western border. On the same day (May 10), the Saudi FM called for de-escalation, Secretary of State Rubio spoke with both PMs and NSAs, urging restraint. Pakistan's DGMO reached out to the Indian side for direct military-level communications. President Trump mediated the ceasefire and announced it on X. On May 11, Pakistan claimed victory against India. Both sides subsequently conducted propaganda offensive through aggressive diplomacy by sending delegations to global capitals. In between the above compressed timeline, a lot went through. The Indian attacks, as per information available through open sources, were 'supposedly calibrated' during May 8 and early on May 9, whereas the wider attacks during May 9-10, still 'presumably' calibrated, were dangerously escalatory, as these were aimed at Pakistan's SEAD (suppression of enemy air defences) systems, after IAF having lost aircraft on May 7. It was sometimes on the morning of May 9 (the US time and evening in India/Pakistan), that the US received unspecified, new but 'alarming intelligence' about dangerous escalation between both sides, as reported by CNN and corroborated by The New York Times. The US worries emerged before the dramatic escalation during the night of May 9-10, but no source has actually 'identified' those worries. The 'speculation' is that Washington observing Pakistan's launch of short-range Fatah-I and -II ballistic missiles and others for the first time during May 9-10 night got aggressively involved. Islamabad's stockpile of tactical nuclear arsenal and Indian thinking of continuing a conventional war of punitive retribution provided a background to it. Some analysts also attribute it to Pakistan's deft diplomacy, signalling to and drawing on the US interlocution, spurred by 'readiness changes in Pakistan's stockpiles', besides the announced meeting of Pakistan's National Command Authority, that oversees the non-conventional means of war i.e. the nuclear weapons. The DG ISPR had, on May 9, declined calls for de-escalation due to the planned riposte under Pakistan's 'quid-pro-quo plus' strategy, to equalise losses caused by the Indian attacks. India later struck Nur Khan airbase around 2:30 am on May 10. This attack was meant to 'strike where it would hurt', to quote the Indian Director-General Air Operations, Air Marshal Bharti. However, that was an escalatory message. The Indian attacks also targeted Rafiqui, Rahim Yar Khan and Sukkur bases during the first wave of strikes, followed by the IAF strikes at Sargodha, Bholari and Jacobabad airbases and some military infrastructure at Murid, Chunian, Arifwala and Pasrur. This was India 'knocking on the nuclear door', and it presumably provided more muscle and lethality to Pakistan's riposte, that was dubbed equally if alarmingly escalatory by Washington. In de-escalation, the predominant view is that the Saudis, the Americans, the Turks and the Qataris rushed to quell India 'not because Pakistan asked, but because Delhi could not stabilize the board…Pakistan had not flinched; it had not folded. It escalated, absorbed and redrew the board'. More on ceasefire exclusively later. Continues…
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
JCP to review tenure of constitutional benches
A crucial meeting of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP), chaired by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi, will be held on June 19 in the Supreme Court building. The meeting will discuss extending the tenure of constitutional benches. The matter was last addressed in the commission's session on December 21, 2024, where a majority approved a six-month extension for the nominated judges of the Supreme Court's constitutional benches. At present, 15 judges have been working for the constitutional benches. Among them, a committee led by Justice Aminuddin Khan and comprising Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazahar selects judges for the particular constitutional benches. Extension of constitutional benches has been proposed for the second time. The federal government on December 21 managed to get its way at the JCP which had rejected a suggestion to nominate all Supreme Court judges to its Constitutional Bench (CB) by a majority vote of 7 to 6. Except Justice Aminuddin, all JCP's judicial members namely CJP Yahya Afridi, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail had voted for all the Supreme Court judges to be part of the CB. Two PTI members Barrister Gahar Ali Khan and Barrister Ali Zafar supported their view. However, the government as well as the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) representatives in JCP did not support their suggestion. The judicial members had faced embarrassment, when their own fellow judge, Justice Aminuddin Khan, did not support their suggestion. The JCP by majority 7 to 6 endorsed the extension of the CB led by Justice Aminuddin Khan for six months. Once again it is being expected that the government will be successful to get majority votes for the extension of present CB, which performance is under question. There is no objective criteria for the selection of judges for CB. Performance of CB The present CB led by Justice Aminuddin Khan has been able to issue only three reported judgement since it's creation through 26th constitutional amendment. The CB had issued first reported judgement in January. This two-page decision was related to the jurisdiction of CB itself. The order had held that regular benches could not hear matters related to the interpretation of law and constitution. Secondly, reported short order has been passed in military courts case. Likewise, another reported judgement was authored by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail. Lawyers are wondering as who will judge the performance of the constitutional bench. They are also raising question that why Justice Mandokhail is not being given independent CB. A lawyer says that the CB started by spending two months studiously avoiding the 26th Amendment case in favour of hearing cases of no importance which had already become infructuous. "It followed that by spending four months almost exclusively on the military courts case before passing a verdict which must surely have pleased the establishment. The only other order of note it passed in that period was to ensure that no regular bench of the Supreme Court could hear any case of importance. "Next, it took up the reserved seats review case in which most of the original judges were excluded and the few who were included seemed to have suddenly, and inexplicably, become of the opposite view from day one", says the lawyer. He said that when the idea of a CB elected by politicians was first floated; many said such a bench was fundamentally against the idea of judicial independence and predicted it would reduce the credibility of the SC to nothing. Nonetheless, judges in Pakistan have sometimes defied predictions. 'Unfortunately, the CB's performance thus far has proved this is not one of those times.' He also said that the stated rationale of the CB at the time of the 26th Amendment was to improve the constitutional jurisprudence of the SC. In its first six months, the number of detailed judgments it has issued can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And all of them have tended to take out jurisprudence backwards and closer to the desires of the establishment,' he adds.
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Bilawal vows strong response if India builds dams on rivers flowing into Pakistan
Bilawal Bhutto along with members of the delegation held a post-visit press briefing at Pakistan High Commission in London, UK on June 11. Photo: Listen to article Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari warned that Pakistan would take more aggressive actions if India goes ahead with plans to construct new canals or dams on the three rivers flowing into Pakistan. 'Were they to act on it, Pakistan has been very clear: we'd consider that an act of war,' he said. Speaking at a press conference in London on Wednesday, Bilawal warned that the risk of a nuclear conflict between Pakistan and India could become a reality if New Delhi carries out its threat to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), calling the move "water terrorism" and an act of war. 'India and Pakistan are bound by the terms of the IWT. India will have to take back and withdraw its threat,' he said, referring to the ongoing tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbours. Chairman PPP and Head of Pakistan's High-Level Delegation, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari addressing a press conference from London. — Pakistan Peoples Party Digital (@pppdigitalpk_) June 11, 2025 Bilawal, who is leading a parliamentary delegation to garner international support for Pakistan amidst rising tensions with India, expressed pride in Pakistan's military strength. He praised the leadership of COAS Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir. 'We are proud that the Pakistan Army won the war against India. Pakistan Army proved that it can defeat India, both at the military and the diplomatic front,' he added. The PPP leader also raised concerns about India's role in transnational repression, pointing to Western intelligence evidence suggesting Indian involvement in terrorism on foreign soil, including the killings of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Canada and the assassination attempt on Sikhs for Justice leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannun in the United States. Bilawal stated that despite India's efforts to push a narrative of Pakistan's involvement in the Pahalgam attack, the Western world has refrained from siding with India due to evidence of its involvement in terrorism beyond its borders. 'India is involved in terrorism on Western soil, they are hiding the truth from their own people,' he said. Wrapped up a successful visit to London with a candid press interaction with Pakistani media in the UK. Throughout the high-level mission, we engaged across the board with UK officials, global think tanks, international media, civil society, and our vibrant diaspora, projecting… — BilawalBhuttoZardari (@BBhuttoZardari) June 11, 2025 He further condemned Indian Foreign Minister Jaishankar's threats to "strike deep inside Pakistan," calling them the rhetoric of a warmonger, rather than a diplomat. He called India a 'terrorist state' and said that its targeting of Sikhs had been exposed globally. The PPP leader also commented on the lack of evidence from India regarding the Pahalgam attack, stressing that India had failed to provide any identity of the so-called terrorists involved. Read More: India's unilateral suspension of IWT could destabilise regional peace: Bilawal Bilawal welcomed US President Donald Trump's offer to mediate between India and Pakistan, calling it a pragmatic approach. He noted that India's efforts to sabotage peace initiatives would not succeed. 'Kashmir is not a bilateral issue, it is an international issue,' he said, adding that India had no choice but to address the matter on a global stage. He concluded by announcing that Pakistan would soon present a new dossier to the international community, exposing India's role in terrorism and laying bare the "true face" of Indian aggression. Head of the High-level Multi-Party Delegation Mr. Bilawal Bhutto Zardari @BBhuttoZardari, along with other members of the delegation held a post-visit press briefing at @PakistaninUK. The High-level delegation briefed about their meetings with leadership and senior officials of… — Pakistan High Commission London (@PakistaninUK) June 11, 2025 Following successful visits to Washington, New York, and London, the Pakistani delegation arrived in Brussels on Wednesday. Upon arrival, the delegation was warmly received by Pakistan's Ambassador to the European Union, Belgium, and Luxembourg, Rahim Hayat Qureshi, along with officials from the Pakistani Embassy. The delegation is scheduled to meet senior officials from the European Union and Belgium. These meetings will address India's disinformation campaign, with the parliamentary delegation providing a robust response to India's aggressive stance and highlighting its intentions towards Pakistan. The delegation will also engage with leading European think tanks and international media representatives to further discuss the ongoing conflict and the importance of a peaceful resolution. Read Also: Bilawal warns Pakistan-India war threshold at 'historic low' The delegation's mission is to debunk Indian propaganda following the recent escalation in tensions between India and Pakistan. The delegation, appointed by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, aims to present Pakistan's position on the conflict, emphasising the need to resolve the Jammu and Kashmir issue in line with United Nations Security Council resolutions and the aspirations of the Kashmiri people. The members of the delegation include Minister for Climate Change Dr Musadik Masood Malik, Chairperson of the Senate Standing Committee on Climate Change and Environmental Harmony Senator Sherry Rehman, Chairperson of the National Assembly Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs Hina Rabbani Khar, former minister for commerce Khurram Dastgir and MQM's Parliamentary Leader in the Senate Senator Faisal Sabzwari.
