Former Prime Minister Imran Khan’s lawyer in the Cypher case, Salman Safdar, speaks to the media outside Adiala Prison. PHOTO: SCREENSHOT/FILE
ISLAMABAD:
Since the passage of the 26th Amendment, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has found itself treading water in the higher courts, struggling to secure substantial relief while key petitions related to its jailed founder and top leaders remain in limbo, deepening the party’s legal and political uncertainty.
The party, whose founder and leader Imran Khan has still been incarcerated for more than two years, continues to knock on the doors of justice to obtain hearings into its cases. However, progress has been slow, with PTI petitions still blocked on several forums.
In this context, Imran Khan’s senior lawyer Salman Safdar on Friday wrote to Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar seeking speedy correction of the petition seeking stay of sentences imposed on Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi in the Al-Qadir Trust case.
Explaining my reasons for approaching the court, the letter states: “What prompted me to approach Your Lordship, through this letter, is the failure of the Islamabad High Court to address the legitimate concern and fundamental right of the clients to have their applications for bail (suspension of sentence) fixed and heard in the criminal appeals arising out of NAB Reference No. 19/2023 (popularly known as Al-Qadir University Trust).
“In keeping with the established pattern of rushed and unfair trials conducted against the couple, the proceedings in the Al-Qadir Trust case were no exception and resulted in an unlawful and unlawful conviction, delivered on 17.01.2025.”
He said the conviction and sentence were challenged on behalf of Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi on January 27, 2025, followed by applications for suspension of sentence filed on March 19, 2025.
“It is respectfully submitted that my clients were on bail throughout the trial; since an appeal is a continuation of the trial, the same standards of speed and parity should have been maintained at the appeal stage as well.”
The letter further states that the efforts undertaken to obtain redress deserve brief mention.
After the removal of unnecessary objections to the office in January 2025, numerous procedural hurdles were overcome before the matter was finally brought before the divisional bench on May 15, 2025, for the issuance of opinions on the applications for suspension of sentence.
Thereafter, proceedings were constantly delayed under one pretext or another, including repeated adjournments requested by the NAB’s mandated lawyer for reasons such as the appointment of a special prosecutor and illness.
“The situation has been further aggravated by the unavailability of judges and the repeated cancellation of cases from the docket. Unfortunately, despite the filing of five (5) separate motions for early hearing, neither the main appeals nor the motions for suspension of sentence (cause) have been heard or decided,” the letter said.
Salman Sardar further states that the court registry has now categorically refused to entertain even fresh petitions.
“This represents a clear, serious and continuing obstruction, creating a systemic denial of access to justice and on top of this, over the past twelve months, national newspapers and social media have also regularly reported that the cases of Mr Imran Ahmad Khan Niazi and his wife were “unlikely to be heard” by the Islamabad High Court.
He further argued that Bushra Bibi’s case deserved special attention, as her arrest was not requested by the NAB throughout the proceedings. The sole allegation against her of “complicity” is completely unsupported by any credible evidence.
She was sentenced to seven years in prison, and the law has always treated cases involving women given shorter sentences leniently.
“It is quite shocking that this established practice has been totally ignored in the case of Bushra Imran Khan.”
“To the deep dismay of my clients and myself, personal visits and repeated requests to the Registrar’s Office and the Case Fixation Department have yielded no tangible results. An entire year has passed without any of the cases being disposed of or heard. This alarming state of affairs urgently calls for the immediate intervention of Your Lordship, as the Custodian and Custodian-General of the Islamabad High Court.”
Furthermore, in light of the large-scale acquittals and the disturbing pattern of false implications in over 300 fabricated cases, it is imperative that all remaining cases, constitutional petitions and appeals be prioritized to enable judicial review of the legality and legality of the convictions.
Salman Safdar further states that he represents both clients as lead counsel in all matters. Client instructions are of paramount importance, because since October 2025, there has been a complete disconnect with clients, who remain confined in Adiala Prison.
Prison officials, in flagrant violation of the prison manual and constitutional rights, are denying attorney-client meetings and communication, an act that cannot be justified by any touchstone.
The letter reminded Justice Dogar that he had assumed office as the Chief Justice of the IHC on February 14, 2025.
As the holy month of Ramzan approaches, the undersigned “respectfully implores your Lordship’s esteemed office to take immediate and decisive action so that all serious concerns raised in this communication can be resolved, thereby restoring public confidence in the judicial system of Pakistan.”
Meanwhile, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi staged a sit-in outside the Supreme Court premises.
Despite all efforts, the PTI failed to arrange a meeting between Imran Khan and his personal doctors.
Earlier, former chief minister Ali Amin Gandapur had approached the SC several times to meet Imran Khan, but without success.
Like the SC and IHC, the PTI was unable to seek relief from the Lahore High Court (LHC) regarding the May 9 cases.
It is learned that the PTI legal team has now started deliberations on whether the party should pursue its cases at the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC). All PTI-related cases have already been transferred to the FCC.
