Islamabad police are urging the advocate general to challenge a recent Islamabad High Court ruling that restricts their access to ‘Call Detail Records’ from cellular companies. This decision, passed by Justice Babar Sattar, significantly hinders the ability of law enforcement and intelligence agencies to investigate crimes and monitor terrorist activities.
The court order came in response to petitions filed by Bushra Bibi, wife of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, and Najam Saqib, son of former Chief Justice Saqib Nisar. Since the ruling, cellular companies have stopped sharing CDR data with law enforcement, jeopardizing investigations into several high-profile cases.
Law enforcement agencies rely heavily on CDRs to track the location of criminals, terrorists, and missing persons. This lack of access also hinders the use of geo-fencing, a virtual boundary technology crucial for crime prevention and rapid response in missing person cases.
Justice Sattar based his decision on the lack of proper authorization under Pakistani law. He argued that current practices violate the Telegraph Act, Telecommunication Act, Fair Trial Act, and Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) as they lack court-approved warrants and proper oversight.
The judge emphasized the importance of due process and outlined the legal framework for authorized surveillance under the Fair Trial Act. This act requires approval from a high court judge and includes oversight mechanisms to ensure accountability.
Justice Sattar concluded that unauthorized surveillance conducted without following the Fair Trial Act infringes upon the fundamental rights to privacy, liberty, and dignity guaranteed by the Pakistani Constitution.
The ruling restricts intelligence agencies and police from surveillance activities except in accordance with the Fair Trial Act and court-issued warrants. Cellular companies are also prohibited from facilitating unauthorized surveillance.
The next hearing is scheduled for June 25th. The Islamabad Advocate General intends to file a petition urging the court to reconsider the ruling.
