Police officers walk past the Supreme Court of Pakistan building, in Islamabad, Pakistan April 6, 2022. REUTERS
ISLAMABAD:
After months of restricting access to justice, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) finally succeeded in forcing the Supreme Court to intervene, leading to a meeting between incarcerated PTI founder Imran Khan and his senior lawyer at Adiala Prison.
Following the SC’s intervention, senior advocate Salman Safdar met Imran Khan on Tuesday inside Adiala jail. The meeting lasted more than three hours and marked the first such engagement after a prolonged ban on consultations between the jailed PTI leader and his legal team.
Speaking briefly to reporters after the meeting, Safdar said the interaction took place as per the SC’s instructions. He added that details of the meeting would be shared in a report which would be submitted to the court on Wednesday (today).
The SC had appointed Safdar as a ‘friend of the court’ to visit Adiala jail and check the living conditions of Imran Khan. However, Safdar clarified that Imran’s health was stable.
Sources said that while Imran’s morale remained high, he was deeply concerned about restrictions on meetings with his family and lawyers. It was also learned that his wife, Bushra Bibi, had conveyed a message to PTI leaders, urging them to focus only on the clearance application so that Imran’s doctors could examine him.
The development comes amid a changing political landscape and follows the SC’s decision to list 13 Imran Khan-related cases for hearing earlier this week, a move that surprised many, including PTI’s own legal team.
A division bench of the SC, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi and including Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan, heard the case. While hearing a case pending for almost three years, the bench sought a fresh report from the Attorney General of Pakistan on Imran Khan’s living conditions in prison.
As per the court order, Attorney General Mansoor Awan appeared before the court on Tuesday and informed it that a detailed report detailing the living conditions of Imran Khan had already been submitted for the court’s consideration in 2023, and the same report had now been filed again.
After examining the report, the bench observed that it relates to the period when Imran Khan was incarcerated in Attock District Jail, in 2023.
“In order to bring judicial relief to the order passed by this court, it is considered appropriate that a report regarding the ‘current living conditions of the petitioner in prison’ be submitted by the Superintendent, Rawalpindi Central Jail,” the order said.
The order further stated that advocate Salman Safdar had been appointed as friend of the court to visit the petitioner at Rawalpindi Central Jail and submit a written report on the “living conditions of the petitioner in jail”.
“In this regard, the Attorney General of Pakistan undertakes that Advocate Salman Safdar, ASC, will be given full access to meet the petitioner and inspect his living conditions.”
The court also ordered Safdar to submit his report for consideration in chambers on February 11, while adjourning the hearing till Thursday, February 12.
The SC’s intervention has since sparked a debate within political and legal circles over the timing and implications of the move.
Several analysts say such an intervention could not have taken place without executive agreement, noting that the government retained the possibility of challenging the order before the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on jurisdictional grounds.
Former PTI lawyer Chaudhry Faisal Hussain described the developments surrounding Safdar’s meeting with Imran Khan as a positive step and “a bit of an ice breaker”.
“After the attacks in various cities of Balochistan, the distance between PTI and powerful quarters has definitely narrowed. Chief Minister Sohail Khan Afridi’s meeting with Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif followed by apex committee meeting and a lackluster approach to the February 8 call for agitation by the current PTI leadership reflects a lot of this,” he said.
Hussain added that there was no visible preparation in the constituencies of top PTI leaders in Punjab before February 8.
“No preparations observed in the constituencies of Punjab’s top leaders, MPs or ticket holders created a fever by indulging in door-to-door campaigning on February 8. Even Mahmood Khan Achakzai himself preferred to attend Asma Jahangir’s conference in Lahore on February 8 after giving a call for strike.”
However, he said there were chances of a meeting between Mahmood Khan Achakzai and Imran Khan before or after Achakzai’s meeting with the Prime Minister.
“These developments are not without rhyme and reason, so as far as Imran’s release is concerned, we will have to wait. During Ramzan, the family reunion might also resume. Since no extension of the agitation is being given by the PTI,” he added.
A section of lawyers believes that while the SC proceedings do not directly challenge the current regime, Chief Justice Afridi may have been forced to intervene amid growing concerns over the judiciary’s perceived failure to ensure fair treatment for Imran Khan.
PTI lawyers are also understood to have met privately with Chief Justice Afridi to demand fair treatment for the imprisoned leader.
Earlier, on January 30, the PTI staged a protest outside the SC premises demanding access to Imran Khan, including for meetings with his personal doctors. PTI general secretary Salman Akram Raja had also met Chief Justice Isa in this regard.
In a statement, the SC said that during the interaction, concerns regarding access to the imprisoned PTI leader, including access of family members and medical professionals, were expressed.
“As the matter raised did not directly relate to ongoing proceedings before the Supreme Court, the concerns were referred to the relevant executive authorities for consideration in accordance with the law, after which the gathering dispersed peacefully.”
The statement added that in the absence of response for a week, a delegation comprising opposition leaders from the Senate and the National Assembly approached the Supreme Court again on February 6, 2026, submitting a signed memorandum which was formally received by the Registrar.
He further said that the SC had also issued standard operating procedures (SOPs) to deal with such situations in future.
“The SOPs emphasize ensuring accessibility, facilitation and provision of necessary amenities, including emergency medical coverage, without compromising institutional decorum, judicial functions or access rights of other litigants.”
