PHC Issues Notice to Attorney General on PTI Petitions Against KP Emergency, Governor’s Rule

The Peshawar High Court on Tuesday issued a notice to the attorney general seeking the federation’s response to petitions filed by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) challenging the imposition of emergency and governor’s rule in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The PHC KP emergency hearing marked the first major courtroom proceedings in PTI’s legal challenge to the federal government’s October 11 takeover of the province.

A two-member bench comprising Justice Ijaz Anwar and Justice Faheem Wali took up the petitions filed by PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Khan and Advocate Salman Khan, who have asked the court to declare the measures unconstitutional and set them aside.

Court Seeks Federation’s Reply, Adjourns PHC KP Emergency Hearing to November 10

After hearing arguments from the petitioners’ counsel, Justice Anwar said the court would issue a notice to the Attorney General’s Office and seek its response. The court subsequently issued the notice and adjourned the PHC KP emergency hearing until November 10, setting the stage for the federal government’s formal defence of the measures.

The petitions name the Federation of Pakistan, the president, the prime minister, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa governor and other relevant authorities as respondents. During the PHC KP emergency hearing, the bench did not grant any interim relief and confined itself to arguments before deciding the next step in the case.

What PTI Argued: War or External Aggression Needed for Emergency

PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar, appearing before the bench, told the court that governor’s rule and the emergency had been imposed on the same day, alongside the formation of an 11-member advisory council and the transfer of 38 deputy commissioners.

He alleged that 12 of the party’s members of the National Assembly and 13 members of the provincial assembly had been abducted. “Our offices have been demolished, and plaques marking the inauguration of development projects have been broken,” he said, alleging that his party was being treated differently from others.

Prior to the PTI chairman, the petitioners’ counsel argued that an emergency could be imposed only in the event of war or external interference. “There is neither war nor external aggression here,” the lawyer told the court during the PHC KP emergency hearing.

The counsel argued that the provincial government had the authority to take measures to tackle terrorism, noting that terrorism had reached its peak in the past but an emergency was not imposed then. The lawyer further contended that Article 234 of the Constitution could be invoked only when a provincial government ceased to function, maintaining that the provincial assembly and government had continued functioning and that there had been no breakdown of the Constitution.

Why the Centre Imposed Emergency in KP on October 11

The federal government, led by the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), imposed governor’s rule and emergency in KP — ruled by the Imran Khan-founded party since 2013 — on October 11. The move was approved by President Asif Ali Zardari on the advice of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif under Articles 232 and 234 of the Constitution.

The federal government cited rising terrorism incidents and the provincial government’s lack of support for counterterrorism operations as the reasons for the move. Since then, KP Governor Faisal Karim Kundi has taken charge of running the province on behalf of the federal government, assisted by an 11-member technocratic KP Advisory Council, while Parliament exercises the provincial assembly’s legislative powers.

Separate Notices Issued on Recovery of Sohail Afridi, Swati and Junaid Akbar

In a significant parallel development at the same PHC KP emergency hearing session, the court also sought responses from the government and relevant authorities on petitions seeking the recovery of the now-dysfunctional KP chief minister Sohail Afridi, Assembly Speaker Babar Saleem Swati and PTI provincial president Junaid Akbar.

During a hearing on the petition filed for the recovery of Afridi, Justice Arshad Ali issued notices to the provincial government, police and relevant officials, directing them to submit their response within two days.

Separately, a two-member bench comprising Justice Arshad Ali and Justice Farah Jamshed heard the petitions regarding the recovery of Swati and Akbar. The court issued notices to the government, the KP inspector general of police and other relevant authorities, seeking their responses to the petitions within 10 days.

What Happens Next in the PHC KP Emergency Hearing

The November 10 date means the constitutional battle over the Centre’s takeover of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa will now play out in full courtroom arguments, with the attorney general’s response expected to lay out the federal government’s legal justification for invoking Articles 232 and 234. PTI, which amended its petition on October 19 to argue that Article 232 requires a resolution from the provincial assembly before a provincial emergency can be declared, has also asked the court to suspend the notification.

The outcome of the PHC KP emergency hearing will determine whether the federation’s unprecedented intervention in a province governed by an opposition party since 2013 can withstand constitutional scrutiny — a decision with consequences for federal-provincial relations well beyond Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Sources: The News (October 20, 2026); Geo News (October 16, 2026).