Islamabad:
Since the passage of the 26th constitutional amendment, Pakistan Tehreek-e-insaf (PTI) has been drifted in hostile judicial waters, fighting to obtain significant relief from the country’s higher courts.
The party, whose founder and leader Imran Khan has remained incarcerated for more than two years, continues to plead with the judiciary for hearings on his business. However, progress has remained slow because PTI’s petitions persist without resolution.
Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (KP) chief minister Ali Amin Gandapur moved the Supreme Court again, asking for instructions for the authorities to organize his meeting with the Party imprisoned boss in Adiala prison.
The appeal is not Gandapur’s first attempt to meet Imran. In June, he filed a similar petition, which the office of the registraire SC sent. An appeal against these objections in the room is still pending.
On June 25, Gandapur appeared in courtroom No. 1, where judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah led the bench in the absence of chief judge Yahya Afridi, who was in Lahore.
When Gandapur asked that his plea for a meeting with Khan be entertained, arguing that it was necessary to discuss the provincial budget, Judge Shah advised him to approach the CJP or the registrar.
The renewed request came after Imran’s declaration on Tuesday, in which he asked Gandapur to officially request the SC for such a meeting.
“Previously, during the budgetary process, no meeting or consultation took place with me. Ali Amin must come and have me informed of governance, law and order and other important provincial questions. For this, efforts must be made at each forum, including the Supreme Court,” read a declaration published in the name of Imran Khan on his social account.
Currently, the constitutional bench can only remember questions of public interest. However, since June 27, he has not made a single hearing. Meanwhile, dozens of constitutional petitions of PTI remain pending.
The party initiates admit that the PTI legal team also hesitates to continue these cases until the fate of petitions contesting the 26th amendment is decided.
Until now, the constitutional bench has rendered three decisions which have seriously weakened the legal position of PTI. First, while exercising his examination jurisdiction, he canceled a previous verdict of SC which was entitled to PTI to reserved seats. Second, he approved the trial of PTI activists before the military courts.
Third, this confirmed the transfer of judges of various high lessons to the High Court of Islamabad (IHC), where PTI had trouble obtaining a repair. Imran Khan had also challenged the transfer of judges.
At the IHC, since March, petitions deposited by Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi requesting the suspension of their sorrows in the case of al-Qadir’s confidence remains undecided, despite repeated requests for an early hearing.
The PTI also complains that despite the IHC instructions, prison authorities continue to restrict meetings between Imran Khan and party leaders and family members. On Tuesday, after three months, the secretary general of the PTI and the family members of Imran Khan were finally allowed to meet him.
During a separate meeting with his legal team, Imran Khan expressed his disappointment as to the failure of the judiciary to dispense.
He said: “After the 26th constitutional amendment, the judiciary became entirely subordinate. These unknown judges do not take measures against human rights violations.”
Like SC and IHC, PTI also faced setbacks in front of the High Court of Lahore (LHC) concerning the affairs of May 9.
The LHC clearly indicated that the convicts must go before their calls against convictions can be heard. Meanwhile, the Pakistan Electoral Commission (ECP), in a hurry, is offset from the MNA sentenced and published the calendar in the by -elections.
On the other hand, the High Court of Peshawar (PHC) prevented the ECP with partial elections in certain constituencies and even interrupted the process of appointment of opposition leaders in the two chambers of Parliament.
The divergence of the approach between the two high lessons has fueled the debate.
Despite the grievances of PTI, a bench of three SC judges led by the CJP Afridi recently granted a deposit of Imran Khan in eight cases linked to the incidents of May 9.
Meanwhile, observers note that it is also a fact that PTI has historically obtained more relief from the judiciary compared to rival political parties, in particular before the mandate of the former CJP Qazi Faez Isa.
Imran Khan was even declared “Sadiq and Ameen” by the SC under the former CJP SAQIB Nisar, while, on the other hand, Nawaz Sharif was disqualified under article 62 (1) (f) of the Constitution.
