Islamabad:
Although the former Primary Minister Imran Khan has been sentenced in five cases since August 5, 2023, none of his convictions has so far been approved by a high court. Likewise, serious questions are raised on equity and non-adhesion to regular procedure during its trials.
Imran Khan’s legal team constantly relies that the regular procedure and the equity requirements devoted to article 10-A of the Constitution were not respected during its trials.
Although the PTI management has not been able to evolve an effective strategy for the publication of Imran Khan in the past two years, the non-adherence of a regular procedure during its trial has raised serious doubts among the masses, which also gives political advantages to its party.
Despite the absence of a joint symbol and the non-deputy player of a playground, the results of the general elections of February 8 were shocking for other major political parties. Until Imran is considered a political victim, his opponents cannot defeat him during a free and fair election, a main lawyer explains.
He said that the two main political parties, the PML-N and the PPP, should have realized that if they wanted to defeat Imran on the political field, the victim’s card should have been removed.
First, Imran Khan was sentenced in the Toshakhana case on August 5, 2023. The trial court, chaired by the additional sessions judge (ASJ) Humayun Dilawar, had granted a three -year sentence.
However, some lawyers believe that there have been serious faults in judgment. They asked why the court of first instance was so in a hurry to decide the case without registering declarations of the witnesses that Imran Khan wanted to present in his defense.
Even the Court of First Instance did not wait for his lawyer Khawaja Haris, to give his last arguments. Faisal Siddiqi, while commenting on the judgment on August 5, had expressed serious concerns concerning the decision of the court of first instance, considering it as a symbolic destruction of political justice in the country.
Siddiqi also said that judgment was “the result of revenge policy on the part of the PDM government and political manipulation by the deep state”. He not only called for the judgment to be canceled, but also urged the higher judicial power to investigate the author’s judge to tarnish the reputation of the entire judicial system.
Shortly after the announcement of the decision, Imran Khan was arrested in Lahore.
After a few weeks, the High Court of Islamabad led by the chief judge of the time, Aamer Farooq, suspended the decision of the court of first instance. The main appeal in this case is still pending in the IHC.
Later, Imran was sentenced in three cases where trials were conducted in Adiala prison. These convictions were granted before the general elections of February 8, 2024. There are serious allegations of manipulation of trials in these questions.
Interestingly, Imran’s conviction in the Cypher was canceled by a IHC division bench led by judge Aamer Faroo. Likewise, in a second case, the Court of Appeal also canceled Imran and his wife Bushra Bibi in the Iddat case.
The IHC suspended their convictions in the Toshakhana case. The final call is still unanswered in this case before the IHC. Meanwhile, the Court of First Instance led the trial in prison of Imran and his wife in the 190 million pound case.
Although the judge has fulfilled all procedural requirements during the trial in the case of 190 million pounds, questions are raised on the maintainability of the case after changes in the NAB law. Likewise, the judge postponed the date of the announcement of the judgment three times.
Despite the passage of more than five months, the IHC has not yet decided on the petitions of Imran and Bushra requesting the suspension of the judgment in the case of 190 million pounds. Imran’s legal team constantly submitted early hearing requests, but the high court has not yet decided on the case.
Now, two Imran Khan trials are continuing in Adiala prison. One is linked to Toshakhana and the other to the May 9 riots. Recently, the High Court of Lahore (LHC) rejected Imran Khan’s post-arrest deposit in May 9 affairs.
Subsequently, the legal team approached the Supreme Court against the LHC order. The case is registered to hear in SC on August 12. After the 26th amendment, as well as the transfer of judges to the IHC, Imran Khan is struggling to obtain aid before the upper courts.
Although the IHC has adopted an order authorizing conditionally of meetings with Imran Khan in Adiala prison, the decision was not implemented by the prison authorities.
Currently, the government is in a strong and Imran Khan position still receives massive support, the only loser is the judicial system, which has so far not complied with the regular procedure and the equity requirements devoted to article 10-A of the Constitution in the last two years.
Recently, judge of the Supreme Court Syed Mansoor Ali Shah published an additional note in the presidential reference case of the former Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. He said that judges must defend their oaths with courage in the face of oppression, because only then the judiciary can really protect democracy and the rights of the people.
“That the lesson of transitional justice is clear … Transitional justice, however, often becomes necessary because, during oppressive domination, certain judges do not respect their constitutional duty, succumbing to the pressure of illegitimate authority.
“This failure allows not only violations of the regular procedure and the rights of fair trial, but also erodes the confidence of the public in the judiciary,” wrote Judge Shah. He said the Bhutto affair serves as a classic example of a political trial, illustrating how these tests can be manipulated to advance authoritarian conceptions.
Similarly, the current CJP Yahya Afridi, in a similar case, said that the extraordinary political climate of the time and the pressures inherent in such an environment seem to have influenced the course of justice in a manner incompatible with the ideals of judicial independence.
