Public Welcomes Imposition of Emergency and Supremacy of the Constitution of Pakistan

Public Welcomes Imposition of Emergency and Supremacy of the Constitution of Pakistan
(Asghar Ali Mubarak)
Banners welcoming the imposition of Governor’s Rule and a state of emergency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa have been displayed along major thoroughfares in the federal capital, Islamabad, and Rawalpindi. These banners feature slogans supporting the supremacy of the Constitution of Pakistan, the restoration of the Federation’s writ, and measures to maintain law and order.
Violations of Article 15 of the Constitution of Pakistan (freedom of movement)—and the constitutional limits placed on it—have been the subject of intense debate amid recent political protests, road closures, and the use of shipping containers to block routes.
Under the Constitution of Pakistan, preventing any citizen from moving freely without valid cause constitutes a clear violation of their fundamental rights; however, the Constitution itself permits the imposition of certain specific restrictions on this right.
Under Article 233 of the Constitution, the State may, during a nationwide or provincial emergency, temporarily suspend or restrict certain fundamental rights (such as freedom of movement, assembly, and expression) to restore law and order. However, under the current implementation, the federal government has decided not to suspend the fundamental rights of citizens.
The imposition of emergency and Governor’s Rule in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa—under Articles 232 and 234 of the Constitution—was primarily driven by the rapidly deteriorating security situation in the province and a lack of cooperation between the federal and provincial governments regarding security strategy.
Following orders from Islamabad IG Captain (Retd) Sohail Chaudhry, efforts have been accelerated to reopen routes that had been closed for the past 24 days and to remove containers from all major highways in the federal capital. Federal Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Dr. Tariq Fazal Chaudhry confirmed that the removal of containers—as conditions return to normal—will alleviate the difficulties faced by citizens and the business community, allowing normal life to resume. According to police sources and the administration, directives have been issued to immediately remove containers and clear roads at all entry and exit points, major highways, and especially around the Red Zone. Orders have also been given to immediately release containers parked outside police stations and hand over their documents to the drivers.
Security concerns facing the federal capital have subsided following the passing of the threat of political protests and a “long march,” as well as the imposition of Governor’s Rule and emergency in the neighboring province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa; consequently, these barriers are being removed. In a recent statement, Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Tariq Fazal Chaudhry expressed hope that the citizens of Islamabad would no longer face such difficulties and that there would be no need to deploy shipping containers in the future.
The reopening of these routes after a period of more than three weeks has brought a collective sigh of relief to the hundreds of thousands of employees, students, and ordinary citizens who commute daily between the twin cities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad.

The reactions from the public and various sectors regarding this political and constitutional move are as follows:
• Relief for the Public and Business Community:
Road closures and the suspension of business activities—caused by prolonged political tension, sit-ins, and protest marches in the twin cities—had disrupted daily life. With the removal of containers and the restoration of normalcy, citizens and the business community have breathed a sigh of relief and welcomed this constitutional development.
• Implementation under Constitutional Provisions:
According to the federal government and legal experts, this measure has been taken in strict accordance with Articles 232 and 234 of the Constitution of Pakistan. Under Article 232, a state of emergency has been imposed due to the deteriorating security and law-and-order situation in the province, while under Article 234, the administration of the province has been entrusted to Governor Faisal Karim Kundi to rectify the “failure of constitutional machinery.” • Protection of Fundamental Rights:
The Federation has clarified that the fundamental rights of citizens (under Article 233) have not been suspended during this state of emergency imposed under the Constitution. This demonstrates that the measure was not taken to establish a civilian dictatorship but was adopted purely to protect the lives and property of the public, address security challenges, and uphold the constitutional writ.
However, the leadership and supporters of the Tehreek-e-Insaf have strongly criticized the move, terming it an assault on democracy and provincial autonomy, and have announced plans to challenge it in court. Meanwhile, the removal of shipping containers from the federal capital, Islamabad, has commenced; citizens have breathed a sigh of relief as these barriers are cleared from a vast area after a prolonged period. This step will resolve transportation difficulties and restore normalcy to daily life, and it is hoped that the need to reinstall such containers will not arise again. According to the President and the federal government, significant security concerns and specific reasons underpin this extraordinary constitutional move. Presidential declarations and reports from security agencies indicate an unprecedented surge in the intensity and frequency of terrorist incidents within the province. Data from security think tanks (such as PICSS) reveals that a large proportion of attacks occurring nationwide during the first nine months of 2026 were reported in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, posing severe threats to the lives and property of citizens. Security forces—particularly the police and law enforcement agencies—are being directly targeted; reports show that police and security personnel were the targets in 73 percent of the terrorist attacks carried out in 2026, alongside a rise in attacks on infrastructure and government buildings. The federal government identifies the operational support received by the banned Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and other extremist groups from Afghanistan, as well as the presence of local facilitators, among the major challenges facing the province. The federal government maintained that the provincial government had failed to strictly implement the national policy regarding these cross-border challenges and the issue of Afghan refugees. A deadlock ensued between the federal government and the PTI-led provincial administration during the final stages of negotiations. According to the Federal Interior Minister, the provincial administration was showing reluctance to openly condemn terrorist groups, review security acts, and fully cooperate with federal agencies against terrorism—a situation termed a “failure of constitutional machinery.” Security was on high alert in both Peshawar and Islamabad due to repeated protest marches and political pressure exerted by the provincial government on the federal capital. The federal government believed that provincial forces and resources were being utilized for political objectives rather than for maintaining law and order, thereby further undermining internal security.

Immediate measures following the imposition of the state of emergency:

• Deployment of the Army: Approval has been granted for the deployment of the army across the province to assist the civil administration under Article 245.
• High Alert in Peshawar and the Red Zone: All major cities in the province, including Peshawar, as well as the Civil Secretariat, have been placed on high security alert.
• Apex Committee Meeting: Governor Faisal Karim Kundi has immediately convened a meeting of the Apex Committee to re-evaluate the security situation and formulate new operational plans to combat terrorism.
Key Fundamental Rights Enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan

The people of Pakistan are entitled to the following fundamental rights under the Constitution, with the country’s superior judiciary (the Supreme Court and High Courts) serving as their guardian:
• Article 9 (Security of Life and Liberty): No person shall be deprived of life or personal liberty except in accordance with the law. • Article 10-A (Right to a Fair Trial): Every citizen has the full right to a fair hearing and legal defense in any civil or criminal proceedings against them.
• Article 14 (Dignity of Man and Protection of the Sanctity of the Home): Human dignity is inviolable, and the privacy of a citizen’s home cannot be infringed upon except in accordance with the law.
• Article 15 (Freedom of Movement): Every citizen has the right to travel freely, reside, and settle within Pakistan.
• Article 16 (Freedom of Peaceful Assembly): The public has the freedom to assemble peacefully and hold rallies or processions, subject to the law and public order.
• Article 19 (Freedom of Expression): Every citizen has the right to express their opinion and enjoys freedom of the press, provided this does not harm the glory of Islam, the integrity of Pakistan, or public order.
• Article 25 (Equality of Citizens): All citizens are equal before the law, and no discrimination based on gender is permissible.
• Article 25-A (Free and Compulsory Education): The State is obligated to provide free and compulsory education to all children aged 5 to 16 years.
The issue of the violation of Article 15 (Freedom of Movement) of the Constitution of Pakistan—and the constitutional limits placed upon it—has been a subject of intense debate during recent political protests, road closures, and the deployment of shipping containers to block access.
According to the Constitution of Pakistan, preventing a citizen from moving freely without valid reason constitutes a clear violation of their fundamental rights; however, the Constitution itself permits the imposition of certain specific restrictions on this right. Under normal circumstances, the following actions are considered violations of Article 15:
• Prolonged closure of highways: Blocking the twin cities (Rawalpindi/Islamabad) or inter-provincial routes for weeks—whether due to political sit-ins, protests, or administrative measures involving the placement of shipping containers—thereby making travel impossible for ordinary citizens.
• Restrictions on entry without legal justification: Forcibly preventing a citizen from entering another province or city in the absence of a valid legal reason, court order, or criminal record.
• Unlawful detention (House arrest): Restricting an individual to their home or a specific area without adherence to the due process of law. The text of Article 15 itself clarifies that this right is not absolute. The State may impose “reasonable restrictions” on this right through legislation based on the following three fundamental grounds: If public order in an area is under severe threat, or if a major security risk exists (such as intelligence reports regarding suicide attacks), the administration can temporarily restrict movement by invoking Section 144.
Restrictions may be imposed on the entry of civilians into prohibited border areas, military installations, or sensitive security zones (such as the ‘Red Zone’).
Specific areas may be sealed or placed under quarantine to curb the spread of an epidemic or disease (as witnessed in the past during the COVID-19 lockdowns). Pakistan’s superior judiciary (the Supreme Court and High Courts) has ruled in various judgments that the administration cannot close major highways for an indefinite period in the name of security. According to the courts, depriving millions of citizens of access to their livelihoods, educational institutions, and hospitals under the guise of maintaining security (such as by placing shipping containers to block roads) violates the spirit of Article 15; the government should instead adopt alternative, modern security measures that do not infringe upon the fundamental rights of the general public.
Since Pakistan’s inception, every province has faced this constitutional instrument of the federation at least once. On October 11, ‘Governor’s Rule’ was imposed in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for the fourth time. After President Asif Ali Zardari signed the summary—initiated on the federal cabinet’s recommendation—to impose a ‘state of emergency’ and ‘Governor’s Rule’ in the province, all powers previously held by the elected provincial government were transferred to the bureaucracy and the Governor. The President granted this approval upon the recommendation of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. Prior to this, the federal cabinet had formally approved the imposition of ‘Governor’s Rule’ and a ‘State of Emergency’ in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa under Articles 232 and 234 of the Constitution of Pakistan. Following the President’s signature, the reins of all administrative affairs in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa will now formally rest with the province’s Governor, Faisal Karim Kundi.
Both Governor’s Rule and a state of emergency have once again been imposed in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. A statement from the Presidency cited rising incidents of terrorism, a deteriorating law-and-order situation, and threats to the lives and property of citizens as the reasons for this move. With the President signing the summary forwarded by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, all executive powers of the province have shifted from the PTI government’s Chief Minister, Sohail Afridi, to Governor Faisal Karim Kundi; simultaneously, a notification regarding the deployment of the army in the province under Article 245 has been issued. Under the 1973 Constitution, the first formal imposition of Governor’s Rule in any province occurred on February 16, 1975, in the then-Sarhad Province (now Khyber Pakhtunkhwa), remaining in effect for 76 days. Hayat Muhammad Khan Sherpao, a senior leader of the People’s Party, was killed in a bomb blast at Peshawar University in February 1975. Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto dismissed the coalition government of the National Awami Party (NAP) and Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam in the province, accusing the provincial administration of failing to maintain law and order. Following this move, Chief Minister Sardar Inayatullah Khan Gandapur was removed from office, and the provincial government’s administrative powers were transferred to the Governor. A second instance of an elected government being dismissed in the Frontier Province occurred during the tenure of the People’s Party’s central government, when Benazir Bhutto was Prime Minister of Pakistan and Pir Sabir Shah was the Chief Minister of a coalition government formed by the Muslim League (N) and the Awami National Party (ANP). On February 25, 1994, acting on the federal government’s recommendation, President Farooq Leghari issued an order imposing Governor’s Rule in the province for two months under Article 234 of the Constitution of Pakistan; this measure remained in effect until April 24, 1994. In October 1999, a nationwide state of emergency was declared by General Pervez Musharraf, resulting in the dismantling of the entire federal and provincial democratic structure; consequently, the Muslim League (N) Chief Minister of the Frontier Province, Mehtab Abbasi, was removed from office, and Lieutenant General (Retd.) Muhammad Shafiq assumed the administration of the province as Governor. The third spell of Governor’s Rule in Sarhad lasted for more than three years, remaining in effect until Akram Khan Durrani of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal took the oath as Chief Minister in November 2002. This period is considered the longest spell of Governor’s Rule in the province’s history. Constitutional experts highlight a clear legal distinction between the dismissal of an elected government and the dissolution of the provincial assembly when imposing Governor’s Rule or an emergency under Article 234. Under Article 234, control of the provincial executive shifts to the federation or the governor solely on the grounds of a breakdown of constitutional machinery, whereas the assembly may either remain suspended or be left intact. Once this measure is implemented, it is constitutionally mandatory to secure its ratification by Parliament (the National Assembly and the Senate); the order automatically ceases to be effective if ratification is not obtained or if the prescribed period expires.