TEAM CODE # P - 16

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ZEUS

YOUNG FIGHTERS FOR JUSTICE (YFFJ)

VERSUS
GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ZEUS
2023

MEMORIAL FOR PETITIONER

1
 TABLE OF CONTENT

Sr. No Particulars Page No.

1 Table of contents 1

2 Table of abbreviations 2

3 Index of Authorities 3

4 Statement of jurisdiction 4

5 Statement of facts 5

6 Issues raised 9

7 Summary pleadings 10

8 Advance pleadings 12

i. Issue (A) 12
ii. Issue (B) 17
iii. Issue (C) 22
iv. Issue (D) 25
9 Prayer 29

2
 Table of abbreviations

SECTION §

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CrP.C

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CPC

PAKISTAN PENAL CODE PPC

CONSTITUTION Cons

SUPREME COURT SC

3
 Index of Authorities

Statutes referred

1. CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN
2. CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL CODE
3. CIVIL PROCEDURAL CODE
4. THE INVESTIGATION FOR FAIR TRIAL ACT, 2013
5. PREVENTION OF ELECTRONIC CRIMES ACT
6. PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION ACT

Case law referred

1. P L D 1998 SC 388
2. PLD 2007 SC 585
3. PLD 1988 SC 416
4. PLD 1962 SC 719
5. PLD 1993 SC 473
6. PLD 1997 SC 99
7. PLD 1992 SC 97
8. 2006 SCMR 55

4
 Statement of jurisdiction

1. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of Zeus exercises jurisdiction to hear and adjudicate the
present matter under the provisions of Article 184 (3) of the Constitution of Zeus, 1973.

2. The prosecution has approached the Hon'ble Court under the relevant provisions of the law,
which are hereby restated as follows

ARTICLE 184 (3) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ZEUS

 Sub § (3) Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 199, Supreme Court shall, if it
considers that a question of public importance with reference to the enforcement of any
of the Fundamental Rights conferred by Chapter 1 of Part II is involved, have the power
to make an order of the nature mentioned in the said Article.

5
 Statement of facts

I. The Republic of Zeus, situated in the continent of Olympus, was previously a colony of
the Hades Empire. Comprising four provinces—Apollo (40% of the total population), Ares
(32% of the population), Artemis (20% of the population), and Athena (08% of the
population)—the Republic boasts a youthful demographic, with 40% of its people below
the age of 21. After a protracted struggle led by Mr. Augustus, independence was achieved
in 1960. However, internal power struggles among provincial leaders ensued, culminating
in the civil war of 1965. The military subsequently intervened, stabilizing the situation, and
an interim government of technocrats was formed in 1968, entrusted solely with organizing
general elections. Despite reservations, all political parties participated in the elections held
in 1970. In 1973, the Republic adopted a Constitution that reflects legislative competence,
upholds the rule of law, and commits to safeguarding human rights.

II. Over the years, the Republic of Zeus experienced multiple shifts in governance as various
political parties assumed power while enduring persistent political and economic crises.
Each successive government attributed the challenges to the preceding administrations and
external interference. In the 2017 general elections, the Kronos Political Party emerged as
the leading party and formed the government. Preceding this, economic difficulties arose
as the COVID-19 pandemic swept globally. Economic issues intensified due to COVID-
19's impact, resulting in a lockdown and a surge in cases. In response, several countries
imposed sanctions, restricting trade and travel with the Republic of Zeus.

III. The government of the Republic of Zeus confronted a dire food crisis due to its non-
agricultural status. Relying on imports for essential food products from neighboring
countries, non-functional trade routes hampered supplies. Consequently, a scarcity of basic
food items aggravated the crisis, presenting significant challenges for the populace.

6
 IV. The Republic of Zeus faced an escalating economic and food crisis, causing considerable
hardship for its citizens. Regrettably, the government failed to implement relief measures,
leaving the suffering population without respite. During this period, the Hades Group of
Democrats, a prominent opposition political party, organized nationwide protests,
including processions, rallies, and road blockades, demanding the government's resignation
and immediate general elections.

V. On June 2nd, 2022, a deeply troubling incident occurred involving workers allegedly
associated with the Hades Group of Democrats attacking state buildings and
infrastructures, and destroying state-owned properties. International media covered the
events extensively, reporting on alleged human rights violations. The gravity of the
incident elicited widespread concern and scrutiny from the international community.

VI. Recently, the Ministry of Science & Technology introduced an AI program known as
"Social-BOT," designed to regulate social media interactions and combat the dissemination
of fake news. By scanning specific keywords associated with an anti-state narrative, the AI
aims to monitor and target users actively engaged on social media platforms. Despite
concerns about its implications for privacy and human rights, the government implemented
the "Social-BOT" for mass-surveillance purposes, echoing international initiatives such as
the Pegasus Project and Carnivore Project.

VII. The "Social-BOT" AI wields substantial control over user interactions on major social
media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. It possesses the capability to
remove posts and tweets, and even block users. Additionally, the AI can track real-time
locations through mobile phone access, facilitating government agencies in locating and
apprehending individuals. The AI's testing phase revealed the potential targeting of
innocent users, raising ethical and human rights concerns.

VIII. Despite the concerns, the government justified the deployment of the "Social-BOT" AI as
essential for countering fake rumors and maintaining public order during protests.

7
 However, the potential misuse and lack of transparency surrounding AI's operation
intensify apprehensions. Balancing security concerns with safeguarding fundamental rights
becomes imperative, necessitating robust oversight mechanisms, adherence to due process,
and transparent AI functioning to protect citizens' rights in the Republic of Zeus.

IX. The Interior Ministry instructed intelligence agencies to apply laws on preventive detention
if individuals, directly or indirectly involved in the June 2nd, 2022 incident, are identified
through surveillance reports generated by the "Social-BOT" AI.

X. Following the June 2nd, 2022 incident, the Interior Ministry directed intelligence agencies
to utilize preventive detention laws against individuals linked directly or indirectly to the
events. The basis for such action stems from surveillance reports generated by the "Social-
BOT" AI, deployed to monitor social media activities and investigate potential connections
to the incident. Concerns arise over possible abuse of preventive detention laws and
reliance solely on AI-generated reports as grounds for apprehension. Upholding legal
safeguards and due process during investigations is crucial to protect citizens' rights in the
aftermath of the incident.

XI. The NGO, Young Fighters for Justice (YFFJ), has filed a Petition invoking Article 184(3)
of the Constitution of 1973 before the Supreme Court of the Republic of Zeus. The Petition
seeks judicial intervention against alleged mass arrests, detentions, and surveillance
activities conducted by the government. Article 184(3) confers upon the Supreme Court
the original jurisdiction to hear matters of public importance involving the enforcement of
fundamental rights. YFFJ contends that the government's actions infringe upon individuals'
rights and liberties on a widespread scale, thereby qualifying as a matter of public
significance. Through the invocation of Article 184(3), YFFJ seeks the Court's intervention
to address and redress the alleged human rights violations arising from the mass arrests,
detentions, and surveillance activities.
XII. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of the Republic of Zeus has acknowledged the Petition filed
by the Young Fighters for Justice (YFFJ) and issued a notice to the Ministry of Interior,

8
Government of Zeus, in response to the allegations of mass arrests, detentions, and
surveillance.

9
 Issues raised

1. Does the Apex Court of the Republic of Zeus have jurisdiction to hear the matter under Article
184(3) of the Constitution?

2. Whether the mass surveillance through Social-BOT AI carried on by the Government a

legitimate exercise of state authority and by the Constitution and under international obligations?

3. Does the removal of social media posts and blocking accounts by Social BOT AI amount to an
infringement of freedom of expression and speech, under the Constitution of Republic of Zeus,
1973 and the law?

4. Whether the arrests and detentions made after 2nd June 2023 by the Constitution of the Republic
of Zeus, 1973?

10
 Summary pleadings

Issue 1
Yes, the apex court does have the jurisdiction to hear the matter under Article 184 (3) because to
have the authority to hear the matter in the apex court, there should be an involvement of public
importance and enforcement of fundamental rights. The apex court may exercise its jurisdiction
because these two are involved. The petition filed against the mass arrest, detention, and
surveillance fall under fundamental rights and public importance because all the acts done by the
government were illegal and breached all kinds of human rights laws.

Issue 2

No, the mass surveillance exercised by the government is not a legitimate exercise, is also
unconstitutional, and does not fall under international obligations. Mass surveillance which was
done by the government is a violation of the right to privacy under article 14 of the constitution.
Further, under international laws, the government also breached the international and domestic
law standards of privacy.
Issue 3
Yes, it is an infringement of freedom of expression and speech under the constitution of the
Republic of Zeus because everyone within the state has freedom of expression and speech. As it
is mentioned in Article 19 of the constitution of Zeus the state guarantees the freedom of speech
and expression to every person within the state.
Issue 4
No such detention that was made after 2nd June, 2023 was not by the constitution of the Republic
of Zeus. In a state people should have the right to protest against the bad policies of the government
and such a right was also ensured by the constitution of Zeus under Article 16 which ensures that
the citizens shall have the right to protest against the government's bad policies. Moreover, such
detention was illegal because of various reasons ● Lack of Probable Cause: ● Arrest without a
Warrant: ● Arrest based on Discrimination: ● Violation of Due Process: ● Use of Excessive Force:
Hence the government also violates Article 10 of the constitution of Zeus 1973, which deals with
safeguards as to arrest and detention. This article provides certain fundamental rights to arrested

11
individuals, including the right to be informed of the grounds for their arrest and the right to legal
representation

12
 Advance pleadings

Issue # 1

1. Definition of “JURISDICTION”
Jurisdiction is a legal principle that determines the authority of a court to hear and decide particular
cases. In this context, Article 184(3) confers special or original jurisdiction upon the Supreme
Court to take up cases that meet the criteria of public importance and the enforcement of
fundamental rights.
While the term "jurisdiction" itself may not be mentioned in this specific provision, the concept
is implicit in the phrase "the Supreme Court shall have the power" to address matters of public
importance involving the enforcement of fundamental rights.
2. Conditions to have the jurisdiction to hear the matter
Supreme Court to have the jurisdiction to hear the matter under Article 184 (3), the matter should
meet the following criteria.
I. Public Importance
II. Enforcement of fundamental rights

 Definition of “Public importance”

In the legal context, the term "public importance" under Article 184(3) of the Constitution connotes
a matter that possesses significant implications on the broader populace or society at large, as
opposed to being limited to individual or private concerns. It pertains to issues that impact a
considerable segment of the population, the entire nation, the state, or the wider community. The
Supreme Court employs this criterion as a means of evaluating whether a specific case justifies its
intervention in safeguarding fundamental rights and ensuring equitable dispensation of justice for
the broader public welfare. This assessment aids the Court in determining whether the case
possesses sufficient societal significance to warrant the exercise of its original jurisdiction and
adjudication in the pursuit of public interest and the preservation of fundamental rights.

 “Fundamental Rights”

"Fundamental rights" refer to the essential rights and freedoms guaranteed to all citizens under
Part II (Articles 8 to 28) of the Constitution. These rights are inherent, inalienable, and inviolable,

13
designed to protect and promote the dignity, liberty, and equality of individuals. They serve as a
foundation for a just and democratic society, ensuring that all citizens are treated fairly and with
respect and that their basic human rights are upheld and safeguarded by the State. The Constitution
grants these fundamental rights to citizens as enforceable legal entitlements, and any infringement
upon these rights is subject to judicial review by the courts to ensure their effective protection and
enforcement.

3. The reason why it has the jurisdiction to hear the matter under Article 184 (3)

The present case involving mass arrests and detentions of over 500 protestors by the government
in response to nationwide protests organized by the Hades Group of Democrats constitutes a matter
of significant public importance and raises crucial concerns regarding the enforcement of
fundamental rights. The right to peaceful protest, as enshrined in Article 16 of the Constitution of
the Republic of Zeus, is a fundamental right essential for safeguarding democratic values. The
large-scale arrests and detentions have disrupted public order and may potentially infringe upon
this constitutionally protected right. Moreover, the international media attention and reports of
alleged human rights violations during the protests underscore the broader impact of the issue,
making it not only a matter of concern domestically but also drawing attention to the nation's
reputation on the global stage. In light of these considerations, the intervention of the Supreme
Court is warranted to uphold the rule of law, protect fundamental rights, and address issues that
have significant public interest, ensuring justice and fairness in the Republic of Zeus.

 Matter of “Public importance” and “fundamental rights”

In the Republic of Zeus, the matter concerning the mass arrests and detentions carried out by the
government gives rise to issues of public importance and the enforcement of fundamental rights,
warranting the intervention of the Supreme Court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution of 1973.

The government's actions of arresting and detaining over 500 protestors who participated in
nationwide protests organized by the Hades Group of Democrats demonstrate the gravity and
widespread impact of the matter. Such large-scale arrests and detentions disrupt public order and
raise concerns about the government's handling of dissent and protests. The right to peaceful
protest, guaranteed under Article 16 of the Constitution, is a fundamental right essential for

14
democratic societies. The mass arrests and detentions of protestors may potentially infringe upon
this constitutionally protected right, thus making it a matter of public importance.

Furthermore, the events leading to international media attention and reports of human rights
violations during the protests exacerbate the significance of the matter. The reputation of the
Republic of Zeus on the global stage is at stake, and the international community closely observes
the government's actions and respect for human rights. The involvement of the international media
underscores the broader impact of the issue, making it a matter of public importance both
domestically and internationally.

In light of these considerations, the Supreme Court's intervention becomes crucial to ensure justice
and uphold fundamental rights. As the highest judicial authority in the country, the Court has the
responsibility to address issues that have significant public interest and impact the enjoyment of
fundamental rights by citizens. The invocation of Article 184(3) by the Young Fighters for Justice
(YFFJ) seeks the Court's attention to address the alleged human rights violations arising from the
mass arrests and detentions. The Court's intervention is essential to uphold the rule of law, protect
fundamental rights, and restore public confidence in the judicial system and democratic institutions
of the Republic of Zeus.

The matter of mass arrests and detentions in the Republic of Zeus is indeed one of public
importance due to its impact on public order, the right to peaceful protest, and the government's
respect for human rights. The Supreme Court's intervention under Article 184(3) is vital to ensure
justice, safeguard fundamental rights, and reaffirm the principles of the rule of law in the country.

4. Rights that are been violated

Argument:

The mass arrests, detentions, and surveillance conducted by the government raise significant
concerns regarding the potential infringement of fundamental rights guaranteed under the
Constitution of the Republic of Zeus. These actions may have implications for the rights enshrined
in Articles 9, 14, 15, 16, 19, and 10A. The matter involves public importance as it pertains to the
rights and liberties of individuals at large, making it a subject of paramount concern for the broader
society. A thorough examination of the specific rights at stake is warranted to assess the legality
and constitutionality of the government's actions.

15
Explanation of Violated Rights:

1. Right to Freedom of Assembly and Association (Article 16):

The mass arrests of protestors and detentions of individuals following the nationwide protests
organized by the Hades Group of Democrats may potentially infringe upon the right to freedom of
assembly and association. Article 16 ensures that citizens have the right to peacefully assemble
and associate with others, expressing their views and grievances against the government or any
other matter of public interest. By resorting to widespread arrests and detentions in response to
peaceful protests, the government might be restricting the exercise of this fundamental right.

2. Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression (Article 19):

The government's surveillance activities, particularly through the use of the "Social-BOT" AI,
might have implications for the right to freedom of speech and expression, as guaranteed under
Article 19. This provision ensures that citizens have the liberty to express their thoughts, ideas,
and opinions without fear of interference or reprisal from the state. Mass surveillance targeting
individuals based on their social media activities and expressions may have a chilling effect on
public discourse and curtail the open exchange of ideas.

3. Right to Privacy (Article 14):

The deployment of the "Social-BOT" AI for mass surveillance potentially infringes upon the right
to privacy protected under Article 14. This provision safeguards individuals' privacy from
unwarranted intrusion by the state or any other entity. The surveillance measures that involve
monitoring and tracking citizens' real-time locations and social media interactions without proper
legal authorization may be regarded as an intrusion into their private lives.

The mass arrests, detentions, and surveillance conducted by the government are matters of public
importance that warrant a thorough examination of their impact on fundamental rights. The
potential violations of the rights to freedom of assembly and association, freedom of speech and
expression, and the right to privacy raise legitimate concerns about the state's adherence to
constitutional principles and protection of citizens' liberties. As such, it is crucial for the Supreme

16
Court of the Republic of Zeus to carefully assess these issues and ensure the enforcement of
fundamental rights in the interest of justice and the rule of law.

4. Right to Life and Liberty (Article 9):

Article 9 of the Constitution guarantees the right to life and liberty of every citizen. The mass
arrests and detentions carried out by the government, without proper legal justification or due
process, may raise concerns about potential violations of this fundamental right. Any deprivation
of life and liberty must be by the law, and individuals should not be subjected to arbitrary arrests
or detention.

5. Right to Due Process (Article 10A):

Article 10A guarantees the right to a fair trial and due process of law. In the case of mass arrests
and detentions, individuals must be afforded their right to due process, including the right to be
informed of the charges against them, the right to legal representation, and the right to a fair and
impartial trial. The government must ensure that proper legal procedures are followed in all arrests
and detentions to uphold this right.

6. Non-Discrimination (Article 25):

Article 25 prohibits discrimination based on race, religion, caste, sex, or place of birth. The mass
arrests and detentions should be examined to ensure that they do not target specific groups or
individuals based on discriminatory grounds. Equal protection of the law must be ensured for all
citizens, irrespective of their background.

7. Freedom of Movement (Article 15):

Article 15 guarantees freedom of movement to every citizen of the Republic of Zeus. The
imposition of surveillance measures that track individuals' real-time locations may potentially
restrict this freedom of movement. The government's actions must be evaluated to ensure they do
not unduly impede citizens' right to move freely within the country.

17
 Issue 2

1. Definition of “surveillance”

Within the confines of legal definitions, entails a methodical and deliberate monitoring process
carried out by governmental authorities or duly authorized entities. This process encompasses the
systematic collection, observation, recording, and analysis of information about individuals,
groups, or activities. The overarching objectives of surveillance encompass the prevention and
investigation of criminal activities, ensuring the preservation of national security, and safeguarding
public interests. The gathering of information through surveillance mechanisms serves as a critical
tool in addressing security concerns and preserving the welfare of the state. However, it is essential
to underscore that such surveillance activities must be conducted in strict accordance with the law,
adhering to constitutional safeguards and principles of due process, thereby safeguarding the right
to privacy and upholding fundamental human rights.

2. Elaboration

Article 14(1) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan explicitly guarantees the
inviolable right to privacy, which is considered a fundamental right. This constitutional protection
ensures that the dignity of individuals and the privacy of their homes are safeguarded, subject to
lawful restrictions.

In line with the constitutional framework, Article 8 of the Constitution establishes the
paramountcy of fundamental rights over any conflicting provisions of domestic law. It stipulates
that any law, custom, or usage with the force of law, inconsistent with the rights conferred by the
Constitution, shall be void to the extent of such inconsistency. Additionally, Article 8(5) explicitly
prohibits the suspension of the rights conferred by this Chapter, except as expressly provided by
the Constitution.

3. "Illegal Government Actions: Breach of Privacy and Fundamental Rights"

The mass surveillance conducted by the government is deemed illegitimate and unconstitutional,
resulting in a violation of fundamental rights. Article 14 of the Constitution of the Republic of

18
Zeus guarantees the right to privacy, and the surveillance measures carried out by the government
infringe upon this fundamental right. The right to privacy is crucial for safeguarding individuals'
personal information, communications, and activities from unwarranted intrusion.

Furthermore, the government's actions have also breached international and domestic laws related
to privacy. The Republic of Zeus is obligated to adhere to international human rights standards,
which protect individuals' privacy and data. The mass surveillance, without proper justification
and legal authority, undermines these standards and raises serious concerns about the protection
of citizens' rights in the Republic of Zeus.

In light of these factors, the Hon'ble Supreme Court is urged to intervene and protect citizens'
fundamental rights, particularly the right to privacy. The Court's intervention is crucial to
upholding the rule of law and ensuring that the government's actions are in line with constitutional
provisions and international obligations. The protection of fundamental rights is of paramount
importance, and the Court's scrutiny of the government's surveillance practices is necessary to
prevent any potential abuse of power and to safeguard citizens' liberties in the Republic of Zeus.

4. "International Obligations on Mass Surveillance and Privacy Rights"

Pakistan is a signatory to multiple ratified international instruments regarding the privacy of

citizens. The Universal Declaration on Human Rights, in Article 12, declares that people are
not to be subjected to arbitrary interference with their privacy. The International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights also recognizes the right to privacy in Article 17. Pakistan has also
ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child which safeguards the privacy rights of children
through Article 16. The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, signed by Pakistan,
includes provisions in Article 18 which protect the privacy of individuals and impose a duty on
states to respect and safeguard citizens’ privacy. These international instruments affirm the
importance of privacy and impose obligations on Pakistan to uphold and protect this fundamental
right.

 The Universal Declaration on Human Rights, in Article 12

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or
correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the
protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
19
  International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 17

1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home,
or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honor and reputation.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

 The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam Article 18

(a) Everyone shall have the right to live in security for himself, his religion, his
dependents, his honor, and his property.

(b) Everyone shall have the right to privacy in the conduct of his private affairs, in his
home, among his family, with regard to his property and his relationships. It is not
permitted to spy on him, to place him under surveillance, or to besmirch his good
name. The State shall protect him from arbitrary interference.

(c) A private residence is inviolable in all cases. It will not be entered without
permission from its inhabitants or in any unlawful manner, nor shall it be demolished
or confiscated and its dwellers evicted.

5. Legal method for surveillance

THE INVESTIGATION FOR FAIR TRIAL ACT, 2013

CHAPTER-2 APPLICATION FOR WARRANT

§ 5. Record of Suspicious Conduct.___ In case where any official of an applicant has reasons to
believe that any person is likely to be associated with or is beginning to get associated with, any
act leading to a scheduled offence, or is in the process of beginning to plan such an act, or is
indulging in such a conduct or activity that arises suspicion that he is likely to plan or attempt to
commit any scheduled offence and, therefore, it may be necessary to obtain warrant of surveillance
or interception, he shall prepare a report thereof with supporting.

CHAPTER-3 ISSUE OF WARRANTS

20
§ 9. Judge to issue warrant in Chambers. ___ (1) The warrant of surveillance or interception
shall be issued by the Judge in chamber.

(2) The authorized officer shall personally present the application in chambers of the concerned
Judge who after considering the same shall pass appropriate orders under Section 11. The file on
which the orders shall be passed, shall be returned to the authorized officer for safe-custody who
shall be duty bound to bring the same on any subsequent related hearings. The Judge shall cause
to be maintained a register as provided for in Section 3(j).

CHAPTER-4 EXECUTION OF WARRANTS

§ 16. Authorization under the warrant. ___ (1) The warrant of surveillance or interception to be
issued by the Judge may authorize and allow the lawful doing of any or all of the following acts,
namely⸻

(a) interception and recording of telephonic communication of the suspect with any person;

(b) video recording of any person, persons, premises, event, situation etc;

(c) interception or recording or obtaining of any electronic transaction including but not limited to
e-mails, SMS etc;

(d) interception and taking over of any equipment used in the communication in respect of which
the warrant is issued, including but not limited to telephone, cell phone, mobile sims, electronic
database, demonstrating linking of electronic communication with the database belonging to the
persons in respect of whom the warrant has been issued: Provided that the Judge shall authorize
take-over of equipment only where the material or statement of the authorized officer discloses a
substantial threat or possibility or an attempt to commit a scheduled offence;

(e) collection of evidence through any modern devices in addition to the ones mentioned above;

(f) use of human intelligence;

(g) covert surveillance and property interference; and

(h) access to any information or data in any form related to a transaction, communication or its
content.

21
(2) Any other form of surveillance or interception that the Federal Government may notify in this
behalf.

6. THE PREVENTION OF ELECTRONIC CRIME ACT

§ 34. Warrant for disclosure of content data.-

(1) Upon an application by an thorised officer that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Court
that there exist reasonable grounds to believe that the content data stored in an information
system is reasonably required for the purpose of a criminal investigation or criminal proceedings
with respect to an offence made out under this Act, the Court may, after recording reasons, order
that the person in control of the data or information system, to provide such data or access to
such data to the authorized officer
7. "Legal Consequences for Unlawful Surveillance: Punishments and Remedies"

THE INVESTIGATION FOR FAIR TRIAL ACT, 2013

§ 35. Unauthorized surveillance or interception .___ Any person who carries out any
surveillance or interception except in accordance with the provision of this Act shall in addition to
any other punishment to which he may be liable under any other law for the time being in force be
punished with imprisonment for upto three years and shall also be liable to fine.

8. Relevant case laws

P L D 1998 Supreme Court 388

Mohtarma BENAZIR BHUTTO and another---Petitioners

Tapping of telephones and eavesdropping of any person is reprehensible, immoral, illegal and
unconstitutional act which the Authorities, finding that there is no clear provision to stop it, have
indulged in such illegal activities. Constitution in clear terms gives guarantee against such
violation. Therefore, such acts are unconstitutional and appropriate mode for its regulation should
be legislated. Till such time it is duly regulated by any legislative act, Supreme Court would be
justified to issue such direction to protect violation of Fundamental Rights.

22
 Issue 3

Definition

The infringement of freedom of expression and speech refers to any action or restriction imposed
by the government or other authorities that hinders, limits, or violates an individual's right to
express themselves, share ideas, opinions, information, or beliefs freely. Statement: Yes it is an
infringement of freedom of expression and speech by the government according to the constitution
of zeus. In this case the government of Zeus infringed the freedom of expression and speech of the
civilians by blocking their social media posts and by blocking their account by social BOT AI.

Argument addressing the issue

 As mentioned in the article 19 that the restriction that can be imposed by the government
is legal only when the speech and expression will be against the integrity of islam, security
of defense of Pakistan, morality or contempt of court but there was no any sound reason
present by the government to start blocking the social media posts because the people of
the state did not breach any of the acts above mentioned in the constitution.. The
constitution of zeus guaranteed the freedom of expression and speech to all civilians within
the state as the Article 19 of the constitution of zeus enshrines the right to freedom of
speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of expression.According to constitution the
civilians hold the freedom to hold their opinion not matter if their opinion against to the
government. Article 19 of this Declaration relates to press freedom: 'Everyone has the right
to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without
interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and
regardless of frontiers. Hence according to article 19 the civilians of the Zeus have the right
to peacefully protest against the bad policies of the government physically as well as on
social media .

"PLD 2007 SC 585 (Imran Khan v. Federation of Pakistan)": In this case, the Supreme
Court of Pakistan ruled on the right to peaceful protest and public gatherings. The case involved
the legal challenge to the government's refusal to allow a peaceful protest led by politician

23
Imran Khan in 2007. The court upheld the citizens' right to peaceful protest as a fundamental
right protected under the Constitution. The judgment emphasized the importance of the right
to assembly and expression as essential components of a democratic society.

 (2) Freedom of expression is one of the fundamental rights of citizens in a democratic state
so the government blocking posts and accounts of civilians on social media violate the
fundamental right that is guaranteed by the constitution of state. Social media is a platform
where the people express their opinion and feelings so it should be the duties of the
government and all law enforcement institutes of the state to give respect to their opinion
whether their opinion goes against them because it is the fundamental right of civilians in
a democratic state. "Benazir Bhutto v. Federation of Pakistan"
 (PLD 1988 SC 416). In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the right to freedom of speech
and expression as a fundamental right of every citizen under Article 19 of the Constitution
of Pakistan. The court emphasized that freedom of speech is essential for the functioning
of a democratic society and allows citizens to express their opinions, participate in public
discourse, and hold those in power accountable.
 (3)The freedom of expression and speech have too much importance for the citizens in a
democratic state because without the freedom of speech the citizen would not be able to
express their feelings. Freedom of expression and speech help citizens to express their
opinions, demands and feelings. Hence it was the responsibility of the government of zeus
to always protect the freedom of speech and expression but instead of that the government
of zeus blocked the post and account of civilians and violated their right of freedom of
speech .
 "PLD 1958 SC 382 (State v. Dosso)": In this case, the Supreme Court of Pakistan
discussed the significance of the freedom of speech as a fundamental right for the citizens.
Maulvi Tamizuddin Khan v. Federation of Pakistan (1955): In this landmark case, the
Supreme Court of Pakistan was asked to determine the constitutional validity of the
Constituent Assembly's dissolution by the Governor-General in 1954. The case involved
issues related to the right to freedom of speech and the proper interpretation of the
Constitution of Pakistan. The Supreme Court held that the Governor-General's dissolution
of the Constituent Assembly was unconstitutional, as it violated the principles of
democracy and parliamentary supremacy. The Court's judgment emphasized the

24
 importance of protecting the democratic process and the fundamental rights of citizens,
including the right to freedom of speech and expression.
 (4) The Zeus at that time also facing a very bad economic crises due to bad policies of
government so at that time it will be the duty of government to let the civilians to make out
their frustration on social media but at that time the government block their posts and
account on social media that increase the frustration of civilians of zeus and too much
misunderstanding grow up between the government and civilians. Moreover the social
BOT AI that is used by the government also contains some defects like it also targets the
innocent people so due to it anarchy is formed between the government and civilians.
 (5) The government of Zeus wants to put pressure on the media to press what they want to
show on social media so that is why the government violates the freedom of free press by
blocking their account and removing their post on social media . Freedom of the press, also
known as press freedom, is the right of journalists and media organizations to publish and
disseminate information without interference or censorship from the government or other
external forces. It is a fundamental aspect of freedom of speech and expression and is
crucial for the functioning of a democratic society. "PLD 1962 SC 719 (Zafar Ali Shah v.
Federation of Pakistan)": In this case, the court emphasized the importance of freedom of
the press and its role in a democratic society. According to facts the state of zeus at that
time was suffer from too much bad circumstances due to bad policies of government and
the civilians was suffering from food crises so at that time it was the right of the civilian of
Zeus to make protest against the government for new election and express their opinion on
social media also because it was their right and social media is a platform from which
civilians express their opinion, demands ,feelings so in that case the civilians of Zeus was
not violate any law. Article 19 of the constitution of zeus also ensures the right of citizens
to peacefully protest against the bad policies of the government.
 (6) Social media is a platform where the people express their opinion and feelings so it
should be the duties of the government and all law enforcement institutes of the state to
give respect to their opinion whether their opinion goes against them because it is the
fundamental right of civilians in a democratic state.

25
 "PLD 1993 SC 473 (Government of Sindh v. Sharaf Faridi)": The court in this case
emphasized that freedom of speech includes the right to criticize government policies and
officials.

26
 Issue 4

Definitions

Detention refers to the temporary holding or confinement of an individual by law enforcement or

other authorities without formally charging them with a crime. It is often used for investigative
purposes or to maintain public order. Arrest, on the other hand, is the act of taking a person into
custody by the authorities based on probable cause to believe that the individual has committed a
crime.

Statement:

No, such detention was not according to the constitution because the constitution of zeus assures
the right of assembly to all citizens under article 16 for protecting their rights.

Argument addressing the issue:

 (1)Actually at that time the state of zeus suffer from very bad economic crises and the
civilians of Zeus were too much frustrated because they don't have food to eat so at that
time the government should have duty to make any contract or did any settlement with the
opposition party and civilians to make them ready to handle such difficult situation together
but rather than that the government made mass arrestation due to which the very critical
anarchy formed between the government and the civilians of the zeus. Mass arrestation:
Mass arrest must have a bad impact on the country due to which the country moves toward
a more critical situation and at that time it was the duty of the zeus government and law
enforcement institute to resolve this situation peacefully by making any contract with the
opposition party and with citizens of zeus but rather then they made mass arrestation due
to which the situation become more critical because it violate the right of citizen. The
effects of mass arrests can be complex and can have significant consequences on various
levels: Legal and Judicial System: Mass arrests can place a burden on the legal and judicial
system, leading to overcrowding in detention facilities, delays in processing cases, and
potential challenges in providing legal representation to all detainees. Human Rights
Concerns: Mass arrests can raise human rights concerns, particularly if the arrests are made

27
 without probable cause or violate due process rights. Arbitrary detentions and lack of
access to legal representation can be seen as violations of fundamental rights. For example,
in cases like "Shehla Zia v. WAPDA" and "Asma Jehangir v. The Federation of Pakistan,"
the Supreme Court has ruled on the importance of providing reasons for detentions and
upholding the right to due process. Public Perception and Trust: Mass arrests can affect
public perception of law enforcement and government authorities. If the arrests are
perceived as unjust or politically motivated, it can erode public trust in the authorities.
Social Unrest: Mass arrests can escalate tensions and potentially lead to further social
unrest, as it may be seen as an attempt to suppress dissent or intimidate protesters.
International Reputation: If mass arrests draw attention from the international community,
it can affect a country's reputation and may lead to diplomatic pressure or international
condemnation. Economic Impact: Mass arrests can disrupt daily life, business activities,
and overall economic stability, particularly if protests or demonstrations are disrupted or if
businesses are affected by civil unrest.
 (2)At that time the country suffered from too many bad economic crises due to bad policies
of the government so at that time it was the fundamental right of civilians to start a peaceful
protest against the bad policies of the government and demand new elections to get rid of
such useless governments. According to article 19 the civilians of the Zeus have the right
to peacefully protest against the bad policies of the government physically as well as on
social media .

"PLD 2007 SC 585 (Imran Khan v. Federation of Pakistan)": In this case, the Supreme Court
of Pakistan ruled on the right to peaceful protest and public gatherings. The case involved the
legal challenge to the government's refusal to allow a peaceful protest led by politician Imran
Khan in 2007. The court upheld the citizens' right to peaceful protest as a fundamental right
protected under the Constitution. The judgment emphasized the importance of the right to
assembly and expression as essential components of a democratic society.

 (3)The Government of Zeus at that critical time rather than to show some responsibility to
protect the state by tackling such critical situation by any peaceful way the government in
sake to protect their government made a bad perception of peaceful protest of civilians

28
 against them by showing that the workers of the opposition party were involved in the
incident of 2 june 2022.
 (4)Moreover, the government uses social-BOT AI for such detention and it also contains
some issues in it and it also targets the innocent people hence in that way the Government
violates the right of privacy and security of civilians.
 (5)The detention made by the law enforcement institute were also illegal because the law
enforcement agencies detain the civilians without any probable cause and arrest than
without any warrant.Actually such arrestation totally base on discrimination that violate
the civilians right of freedom of assembly that is guaranteed by constitution of Zeus to
every citizen under Article 16. Lack of Probable Cause: Mass arrests can raise human
rights concerns, particularly if the arrests are made without probable cause or violate due
process rights. Arbitrary detentions and lack of access to legal representation can be seen
as violations of fundamental rights.

Benazir Bhutto v. The State (PLD 1997 SC 99): The court declared the detention of Benazir
Bhutto illegal as it was made without any charges being framed against her, which violated her
rights under Article 10 of the Constitution. Arrest without a Warrant:Arrests made based on a
person's race, religion, ethnicity, or other protected characteristics rather than evidence of
wrongdoing may be illegal and discriminatory.

State v. Shaukat Mehmood (PLD 1992 SC 97): In this case, the Supreme Court of Pakistan held
that arrests made without a warrant and without reasonable grounds are illegal and violate an
individual's fundamental rights. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to due process
and the rule of law, stating that arrests without a warrant should only be made in exceptional
circumstances, such as when a person is caught committing a crime or when there is credible
information of an imminent threat.

 (6) The law enforcement institute was also not presented such detain persons in front of
judiciary with in 24 hours and also not allowed him to make contract with their legal
representative for their defense so the government with law enforcement agencies violate
article 10 of the constitution of Zeus Violation of Due Process: Every individual has the
right to due process, which includes being informed of the charges against them and having
access to legal representation. If these rights are violated during the arrest or subsequent

29
 proceedings, the arrest could be considered illegal. The law enforcement institute of zeus
did not produce the detainee in front of court.

Mirza Tahir Hussain v. The State (2006 SCMR 55): In this case, the Supreme Court
emphasized the significance of prompt production of the detained person before the court and
declared that any unnecessary delay in producing the detainee would render the detention
illegal under Article 10.

 (7) Arrest based on discrimination: if arrest is based on any type of discrimination then it
is not valid as in that case the government arrests only the worker of the opposition party
to make pressure on them to not start a protest against the government. As in that case the
government only arrests the workers of the opposition party and uses the executive power
for their political agenda.

Chaudhry Iftikhar Ahmed v. General Pervez Musharraf (PLD 2009 SC 879): In this case,
the Supreme Court held that the detention of judges during the state of emergency was illegal,
and they should have been provided with a fair opportunity to defend themselves.

30
 Plea

1- In light of the facts stated, arguments advanced and authorities cited, the Respondents
respectfully submit before the Honorable Court that the mass surveillance exercised by the
government was a violation of the right to privacy and they should be awarded according
to the law without any leniency.
2- The petitioner also submits that the apex court should immediately stop the government
from blocking the sites and the expression of the subjects of the state.
3- The petitioner further submits that the people who were detained were unconstitutional and
the petitioner plea the apex court to order of immediate release of the people.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

COUNSEL(s) FOR THE PETITIONER

31