Jail authorities fail to present Imran Khan in court despite IHC directives

ISLAMABAD: Despite the Islamabad High Court (IHC) order, the jail authorities failed to produce Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan before the court in personal capacity on Friday.

The IHC had directed the authorities in this regard during the hearing of Mashal Yousafzai's petition against the denial of permission to meet the PTI leader, who is incarcerated at Rawalpindi's Adiala Jail.

Initially during today's hearing, the court remarked that if the Islamabad advocate general (AG) intends to proceed with the video link appearance, they must inform the it. However, if the PTI founder is not presented via video link by 2pm, he must be brought before the court in person at 3pm.

After the 2pm deadline expired, the former prime minister was due to be presented in court in person, as per the court orders.

However, the Islamabad advocate general (AG) informed the court that bringing the PTI founder from jail was not possible due to security concerns and that presenting him via video link was also not feasible.

The court directed the Adiala jail superintendent and Islamabad AG to submit their affidavits in this regard.

The court also formed a commission to send law clerk Sakina Bangash to visit Adiala Jail and confirm from the PTI founder whether Yousafzai was his lawyer or not. The commission that includes the law clerk has been directed to meet Khan tomorrow (Saturday), and the jail superintendent has been instructed to make arrangements for the meeting.

At this, Yousafzai said that formation of the commission was a golden opportunity for them. She also requested that the commission ask whether the PTI founder is being allowed to meet his friends.

The Islamabad AG then said that the court order was related to meetings with lawyers, not friends.

Justice Sardar Ejaz Khan remarked that Yousafzai was appearing before the court as a lawyer, and the court was hearing the petition accordingly.

Earlier, the court remarked that failing to comply with a prior court order, which was issued with the consent of all parties, amounts to contempt of court. In the previous hearing, the court had ordered that the petitioner be allowed to meet the PTI founder.

Expressing disappointment, the judge said that the jail authorities were expected to follow the court’s directive. "Prima facie, the court is convinced that the jail authorities have committed contempt," it remarked.

The court also noted that a list was submitted, purportedly provided by the PTI founder. However, if the court is not satisfied with its authenticity, it will directly verify it from him.

Expressing frustration with the jail authorities, the court rebuked the jail superintendent, saying that they had turned the matter into a mockery.

During the hearing, Advocate Shoaib Shaheen informed the court that the political leadership had been unable to meet for the past five months. Justice Sardar questioned the Adiala Jail superintendent, asking whether he had been informed why he was summoned.

Superintendent Abdul Ghafoor Anjum responded that he had been out of the city. Justice Sardar further inquired why a meeting was not arranged the previous Friday. The jail official said that the PTI founder had not wished to meet anyone on that day.

The judge also raised concerns over the previous court order, questioning why Yousafzai was made to wait in the superintendent’s office instead of facilitating the meeting.

The jail superintendent replied that the PTI founder and his wife, Bushra Bibi, had said that Yousafzai was neither their lawyer nor their focal person.

The court then asked Yousafzai about the cases in which she is PTI founder’s lawyer.

“How many cases do you have in the Peshawar High Court? and what is your standing as a lawyer?" he asked.

Meanwhile, a list of six lawyers appointed by the PTI founder was presented in court, bearing his signature. The jail superintendent informed the court that the PTI founder and Bushra Bibi are allowed to meet every Tuesday.

The court then adjourned the hearing until Wednesday (March 19).