Law: Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 11-B, 11-EE, 11-C, 11-D, 11-E

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 8, 9, 10-A, 16, 17, 17(2), 19, 256, 5

 Tagline PTM Proscription — Constitutional validity of Sections 11-B & 11-EE of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 — Cabinet approval — Alternative statutory remedy — Constitutional petition dismissed as premature/non-maintainable.  Case Summary The Peshawar High Court upheld the constitutional validity of Sections 11-B and 11-EE of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, found no foundational defect in the Federal Cabinet's approval of PTM's proscription, and dismissed the constitutional petitions as premature because an efficacious statutory remedy before the Review Committee was available. Most Important Takeaway The judgment does NOT finally hold, on merits, that the evidence against PTM conclusively established terrorist activity. Rather, it holds that the proscription mechanism itself is constitutionally valid, the Cabinet procedure was lawful, and the sufficiency of the underlying material should first be challenged before the statutory Review Committee.   ORDER; SAHIBZADA ASADULLAH, J.-                                                               This single judgment shall also decide the connected Writ Petition No. 6497-P/2024, titled Muhammad Bilal & others versus Federation of Pakistan & others, as well as the connected writ petition No. 5046-P/2024, titled Masoom Shah v. Federation of Pakistan and others, as the issues involved in the petitions are interrelated and rest upon identical questions of law and fact, we deem it expedient to consolidate them for the purpose of adjudication. Consequently, the same are decided by means of this single, common judgment. The petitioners have called into question the Notification dated 06.10.2024 (S.R.O. No. 1620(I)/2024), issued by the Federal Government at Islamabad, whereby, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 11-B of the Anti-Terrorism…