1724319076-0%2FUntitled-design-(5)1724319076-0.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Imran tells LHC facing political vendetta
On Monday, a division bench of the LHC, comprising Justice Syed Shahbaz Ali Rizvi and Justice Tariq Saleem Sheikh, resumed hearing Imran bail applications in eight May 9 cases including the Corps Commander House attack case.
The counsel for the PTI founder, Salman Safdar, told the bench that he had presented his argument at the last hearing of the case. In his petition, Imran stated that he was falsely accused that he and his party leaders hatched a conspiracy prior to May 9, 2023 to attack state institutions in the event of his arrest.
He urged the court to grant him bail in all May 9 cases and order his release. The bench will resume hearing the case on April 17. Earlier, on November 27, 2024, an anti-terrorism court (ATC) dismissed all his bail applications.
Meanwhile, an ATC in Islamabad on Monday reserved its order on bail applications of 86 PTI members who were booked in cases of vandalism after the party's November 26 protest.
The ATC presided over by Judge Abual Hasnat Muhammad Zulqarnain held a hearing on the bail petitions filed by PTI workers, who were represented in court by Advocate Sardar Muhammad Masroof, Advocate Amna Ali, Zahid Bashir Dar, Ansar Kayani, Murtaza Turi, and Fatehullah Burki.
Advocate Kayani argued that none of the accused were originally nominated in the case; they were identified later through an identification parade, which was conducted five months after the incident.
He also pointed out that the identification procedure was conducted entirely in English. "Could the police officials speak English? Could the accused understand English?" he asked.
The lawyer said no recovery was made from the accused. He lamented that when PTI workers are released in Rawalpindi after five- to six-month detention, they are implicated in cases in Islamabad.
Kayani argued that statements given in police custody carry no legal weight and there is no specific role attributed to any accused, no recoveries, and no evidence. He requested the court to grant bail, noting that the court had already granted bail to some accused in related cases.
Advocate Sardar Muhammad Masroof Khan stated that no accused was arrested from the scene by police; all were taken from their homes. The defense lawyer added that the bails previously granted by the court had also been upheld by the Islamabad High Court.
He noted that recoveries mentioned in the FIRs had already occurred in Rawalpindi.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
APC calls for abolishing SIFC, 26th Amendment, creating new 'Charter of Democracy'
Opposition leaders attend the day two of the All Parties Conference in Islamabad on Aug 1, 2025. Photo: X/YousafzaiHusain Listen to article Opposition leaders urged all political parties to come together to establish constitutional norms for inter-party relations, calling for a new democratic framework, systemic reforms, and an end to political victimisation and institutional overreach. An All Parties Conference (APC), organised by Tehreek Tahafuz Ayin-e-Pakistan (TTAP), was hosted at former senator Mustafa Nawaz Khokhar's residence in Islamabad on Mahmood Khan Achakzai's invitation. The conference brought together leaders of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), Pashtunkhwa Milli Awami Party (PkMAP), former senators, legal experts, and civil society groups. Issuing a wide-ranging manifesto, the APC demanded the dissolution of the Special Investment Facilitation Council (SIFC) and the 26th Amendment, immediate release of political detainees, lifting of media restrictions, and the referral of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the International Criminal Court (ICC). Read More: Opposition demands end to 'engineered politics' Reading out the joint declaration, Khokhar condemned 'escalating authoritarian practices' and demanded immediate release of Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi, with expedited hearings in the Islamabad High Court and Supreme Court. He described the sentencing of dozens of PTI activists and opposition lawmakers a day earlier as a 'black day' in democratic history, asserting 'the hybrid regime wants the complete elimination of opposition in the country.' Delegates also called for the creation of a new 'Charter of Democracy' reaffirming the supremacy of the 1973 Constitution, rule of law, judicial independence, and the establishment of an impartial and autonomous Election Commission. A declaration warned: 'As a result of successive assaults by the hybrid regime, the Constitution of Pakistan—including the fundamental rights in Articles 8 to 18—and the parliamentary democratic system have been rendered meaningless.' Also Read: FO slams India's 'Operation Mahadev' as 'entirely fabricated' The conference further demanded abolition of SIFC, calling it unconstitutional and in violation of the 18th Amendment. 'SIFC is contrary to the spirit of the 18th Amendment and the Constitution. We demand its dissolution and cancellation of plans to transfer millions of acres of land—acquired in the name of corporate farming—to Green Initiative Company.' Criticising civil–military interference, the APC accused federal and defence institutions of undermining civilian agencies, eroding public trust in law enforcement and the justice system. It demanded immediate reforms and restoration of confidence in the judiciary. Addressing judicial independence, the resolution declared: 'Following the 26th Constitutional Amendment, judicial independence has been reduced to a slogan and is effectively nonexistent in Pakistan. Kangaroo courts are now serving establishment interests; regular courts serve select individuals, while the chief justice has become a symbolic figurehead.' To reverse this, the conference called for full repeal of the amendment, ending all interference, and establishing an impartial system for judicial appointments. 'To restore the sanctity of the judiciary… the complete repeal of the 26th Constitutional Amendment is necessary,' it said. Also Read: Imran's sons await visa approval, says Aleema Khan On provincial autonomy, the APC demanded that mineral resources in Balochistan, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, and Gilgit‑Baltistan remain under local control, declaring any legislation or contracts made without provincial consent as null and void. The declaration also demanded release of missing persons in Balochistan and K‑P via court appearances, immediate dissolution of illegal private militias alleged to have establishment backing, and release of political prisoners. It insisted on the constitutional right to fair trials. It further called for removal of restrictions on pilgrims (Zaireen) from Balochistan heading to Iran and Iraq, terming bans a violation of religious and human rights, and demanded greater local involvement in managing border areas adjacent to Iran and Afghanistan. Also Read: Five cops martyred as Katcha bandits attack check post in Rahim Yar Khan Promoting transitional justice, the APC proposed a Truth and Reconciliation Commission modelled on South Africa, stating: 'Every institution or individual who, from the founding of Pakistan until today, has played any role against democracy, the rights of the people, or the Constitution must voluntarily appear before this commission and confess to their crimes and errors.' The resolution emphasised promoting democratic culture and inter‑party consultation to curb political victimisation. Voicing concern over Pakistan's socio‑economic situation, the APC highlighted that around 45 per cent of Pakistanis live below the poverty line, salaried purchasing power has declined by 58 per cent, overall unemployment stands at 22 per cent and youth unemployment exceeds 30 per cent. Finally, the opposition urged the K‑P government to comply with the Peshawar High Court's verdict striking down the FATA‑TOF regulation and to withdraw its appeal in the Supreme Court.
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
Exceptionalism versus state credibility
Listen to article The literally en mass convictions (related to the May 9, 2023 protests) on account of terrorism and the resultant disqualifications of several PTI stalwarts including Omar Ayub, Shibli Faraz, Senator Ejaz Chaudhry, MNA Muhammad Ahmad Chattha and Punjab Assembly opposition leader Ahmad Khan Bhachar by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) exemplify a new brand of exceptionalism. Exceptionalism is a term often associated with the policies of the United States and its European allies in defending their interests, regardless of logic or morality. However, Pakistan has also been experiencing exceptionalism of a different kind in recent years. The ongoing terrorism in Balochistan and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa provinces, the state's narrative against violence and the disqualification of PTI MPs suggest exceptional approaches. Are these routine occurrences or consequences of Pakistan's exceptionalism in recent years? Ayub, Faraz, Chaudhry, Chattha and Bhachar were sentenced to 10 years in prison each under anti-terrorism charges related to the May 9 protests and riots. Their convictions were not surprising. Similarly, an opposition MP in the Punjab Assembly, Rana Shahbaz Ahmad, recently questioned the institution of multiple cases against him under the Anti-Terrorism Act. While holding the Holy Quran, he asked other MPs if he looked like a terrorist. This context fits the term exceptionalism, which denotes selective application of laws, subversion of regulations for expedience and socio-political discrimination in favour of certain groups. This approach distorts governance, stunts the rule of law and raises questions about the conduct of state institutions, which often claim to uphold the rule of law and justice for all but engage in actions that contradict their exhortations to the public. Exceptionalism undermines the state's integrity and authority by discrediting narratives against non-state actors. While certain segments face state-sponsored wrath and attacks on rights, the official advocacy for justice, equality and expectation of loyalty to the state loses credibility. Rhetoric on the rule of law becomes meaningless when protectors of state lands ally with lawbreakers and land grabbers. Citizens doubt the rule of law when state institutions turn a blind eye to political, non-political or religious groups intruding on public spaces, occupying green areas and disregarding laws. When religio-political groups are seen as tools for power politics, the state loses credibility. Can the rule of law thrive without action against anti-state elements? If the status quo persists and short-sighted policies continue, threats from within will also persist. State institutions use parties and individuals as socio-political crutches, disregarding the fact that most hosts (mosque/madrassas) and their guests (often militants/insurgents of different shades) are actually ideological partners. Many mosques and madrassas run by factions of mainstream parties serve as conduits and shelters for proxy terrorists but state institutions can't dare check them out. Such duplicity and inaction — a kind of exceptionalism vis a vis certain groups — also drain investors' confidence and casts doubt on the intent against terrorist groups. Even China's strategic patience in economic engagement can wear thin if Pakistani leaders continued the path of ambiguity as far as order and justice is concerned. Certainty of punishment is the primary reason for lower crime rates in countries like China, Iran, Central Asian Republics and Middle Eastern countries. Quick institutional responses and certainty of punishment deter such crimes. Until state institutions showcase exemplary case settlement through efficient policing, quick prosecution and a justice-focused judiciary, law-breaking will increase without fear of punishment. Until the state demonstrates indiscriminate justice to all law-breakers, crime will thrive, damaging the integrity of the rule of law narratives. Narrative is abstract, but its outcomes - indiscriminate due process of justice — are not. When people see the state's top brass indulge in expedient actions that run contrary to the notion of rule of law, they stop trusting the state. Compassion, favouritism and expedience subvert law and weaken public belief in it. Common people will believe only when justice is served to victims, and violators are punished. A people-centric rights-based advocacy campaign should accompany strict punishment. Indiscriminate commitment to and execution of the rule of law facilitates state narratives on rights and justice. Exceptionalism undermines state narratives against subversive groups or non-state actors. The civil and military leadership may peddle the anti-terrorism notions or scream day and night about their commitment to the rule of law, yet not many would accord any credence as long as people at large view that rhetoric being at variance with actions on ground. The most current example of exceptionalism's bitter outcomes is the genocide of the Palestinians at the hands of Israelis who are willfully starving tens of thousands of besieged, helpless Gazans, including women and children. Few people across the globe trust the sympathetic statements that ring out of major capitals because people at large view them as Israel-abettors. Similarly, exceptionalism is accruing huge credibility costs to the Pakistani society too. The sooner this approach ends the better it may be for the integrity and credibility of the state institutions. The latest round of convictions will only further erode the state credibility and deepen the wedge between the people and the state.
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Properties of 120 PTI lawmakers, workers forfeited in May 9 cases
Supporters of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) throw stones after police fire tear gas to disperse them in Lahore on May 9, 2023. PHOTO: REUTERS/FILE Listen to article An Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) in Sargodha has sentenced Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) worker Ismael Khan to life imprisonment and forfeited his entire property to the state in connection with a May 9 riot case filed with the Mianwali police. This is the third judgment among those delivered by Anti-Terrorism Courts in which the convict's entire property has been forfeited to the government. A total of 120 PTI leaders and workers have had their properties confiscated. Previously, a Faisalabad court forfeited the properties of 90 convicts to the government, while 29 others had their properties forfeited by the Sargodha court under Section 7(2) of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997. Read More: PTI's Omar Ayub, Shibli Faraz sentenced to up to 10 years in May 9 cases On May 9, 2023, PTI lawmakers and supporters staged violent protests across the country in response to the arrest of party founder Imran Khan. The protests involved vandalism of military installations and state-owned buildings, including the Corps Commander's house in Lahore. The case involves charges against 53 accused individuals, including prominent PTI lawmakers such as opposition leaders Omar Ayub (National Assembly) and Malik Ahmad Khan Bhachar (Punjab Assembly). However, two accused, Ayub and Ziaul Haq, initially absconded during their statements under Section 342 of the CrPC. Additionally, 50 other accused fled during the final arguments, leading to their case being separated from that of the remaining accused after proclamations were issued. The ATC judge noted that attempts appeared to be made to delay the proceedings by these absconders, potentially indicating deliberate efforts to prolong the decision of the case.
