Pakistan jails eight senior members of Imran Khan's party over 2023 protests
Mr Khan faces a separate trial on similar charges, with prosecutors accusing him and fellow PTI party leaders of instigating the unrest that saw protesters attack government and military sites, including the army's headquarters in Rawalpindi and a senior commander's residence in Lahore.
Tuesday's ruling has no direct bearing on Mr Khan's ongoing trial, Reuters reported.
The convicted PTI members include officials of the party's previous provincial government in Punjab such as Yasmin Rashid, Ejaz Chaudhry, Mehmoodur Rashid, and Umar Sarfraz Cheema.
The trial was held behind closed doors in a prison in Lahore city.
The sentencing of its eight prominent members is the latest in a wave of prosecutions targeting Mr Khan's PTI following his ouster in 2022.
Defence lawyers plan to appeal, citing inconsistencies in the rulings against people charged with the same offences. 'It's surprising that six people were acquitted while eight were convicted, even though they were all charged under the same allegations,' defence counsel Burhan Moazzam said.
Among those acquitted was PTI vice chairman Shah Mehmood Qureshi. The former foreign minister remains in custody on separate charges.
After Mr Khan's arrest on corruption charges on 9 May 2023, thousands of his supporters stormed military installations in a dramatic escalation of unrest triggered by his ouster the previous year. The ensuing clashes left 10 people dead in the capital city of Islamabad and led to the arrests of around 4,000 people.
Mr Khan's supporters, who accused the powerful military of orchestrating his ouster through a no confidence vote, targeted an airbase, multiple cantonments, the residence of a senior general, and the army headquarters after the leader was forcibly removed from a courtroom and taken into custody.
Mr Khan, 72, completes two years in prison next month. He faces around 150 charges, ranging from corruption to terrorism. His party claims all the cases filed against him are politically motivated.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
a few seconds ago
- Spectator
The leaked email that blows apart the BBC's impartiality claims over Gaza
A leaked internal email from a BBC executive editor reveals that the Corporation has issued prescriptive instructions to staff on how to cover the humanitarian situation in Gaza. The memo, titled 'Covering the food crisis in Gaza', amounts to a top-down editorial diktat that discards impartiality, elevates one side of a deeply contested narrative, and imposes a specific anti-Israel legal-political framing as settled fact. The existence of this email is a telling sign of how the Corporation works to ensure its journalists stick to its own ideological angles. The email, which was sent to BBC staff on Friday, begins by declaring that 'the argument over how much aid has crossed into Gaza is irrelevant' and instructs staff that 'we should say' the current distribution system 'doesn't work'. It explicitly favours a particular explanation of suffering in Gaza: one that blames the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a relatively new aid body established with US and Israeli cooperation, while glossing over the role of Hamas, the rulers of Gaza and a proscribed terrorist organisation under British law. But the quantity of aid entering Gaza is not irrelevant. If Hamas is hijacking, obstructing, or reselling aid, as Israeli and independent reports suggest, and as documented footage and testimony have supported, then the location, handling, and efficacy of aid delivery become vital indicators of where the problem lies. Blaming Israel alone for the humanitarian breakdown while exonerating or ignoring Hamas is not responsible or fair journalism, especially as Israel argues it is going to extreme lengths to try to mitigate the jihadi terrorists' efforts to persecute and deprive Gazan citizens. The BBC's memo labels the GHF system a failure and instructs staff to say so. Yet the evidence is far from conclusive. Hunger and deprivation levels in Gaza remain unclear, with wildly varying estimates depending on source and political posture. The BBC – which declined to comment on the email – appears content to accept casualty figures and starvation claims from Hamas-linked bodies or sympathetic NGOs as definitive, while dismissing or omitting Israeli data and counterclaims. The email directs staff to reference 'mounting evidence' of starvation and deaths around aid centres, yet makes no mention of Hamas operatives looting convoys, obstructing access, or even firing on civilians attempting to collect food – allegations which have been made publicly by Israel and backed at times by video and eyewitness testimony. Even the photographic evidence used by some UK newspapers has been limited and uncertain: photos clearly taken in the same photo shoot, by one photographer linked to a far from impartial Turkish photo agency, show an emaciated child, but tragic as that is, one child does not indicate a famine. Indeed, it has been speculated by some that the child in question demonstrates visual signs of other pre-existing health conditions which would potentially cause wasting and malnutrition, a possibility backed up by the presence of other healthy and well-fed children appearing alongside him in the same photo set, apparently living in the same family home. Nor is the GHF model simply an improvised, amateur system as the memo suggests. On the contrary, it is a tightly managed, military-grade distribution network designed to ensure aid reaches civilians directly and safely. Operated by vetted personnel with logistical oversight, GPS tracking, and on-the-ground medical and security staff, the GHF has reported a zero aid diversion rate. By contrast, the UN system the BBC nostalgically defends saw multiple convoys looted at gunpoint, with documented losses reaching 90 per cent in some cases. It is therefore tendentious to assert that the older model 'did work' when, in fact, the BBC itself breathlessly reported widespread hunger under that very system well before the GHF system was in place: on 10 February 2024, for example, the BBC's Lucy Williamson reported that in northern Gaza, 'children are going without food for days' and that some residents had resorted to 'grinding animal feed into flour to survive.' Most egregious is the email's declaration that it is 'indisputable' that Israel is the occupying power in Gaza and therefore legally responsible for preventing hunger. This claim is presented without qualification, despite the fact that the status of Gaza under international law is disputed. Israel disengaged from Gaza in 2005, removing all settlers and military presence. It argues, with some legal backing, that it does not meet the criteria of occupation, since it neither governs Gaza nor maintains a permanent presence. Even under post-October 7 operations, Israel maintains that its actions constitute temporary military engagement, not sovereign control. International legal opinion may be divided on this. The BBC's own editorial guidelines insist that politically contested labels such as 'occupation' should be attributed and contextualised, not asserted. That rule has been disregarded. The internal memo presumes a singular legal reality, eliding complexity in favour of moral indictment. The BBC memo mirrors the line taken by BBC presenters, including Nick Robinson, who recently interviewed the Israeli government spokesman David Mencer. It sounded like institutional ventriloquism, from the body which insists it won't call Hamas terrorists, but has no room for debate over whether Gaza is 'occupied'. In asserting the infallibility of its chosen narrative, the BBC omits basic journalistic standards: to interrogate all sides, to distinguish between fact and allegation, and to treat political and legal claims with appropriate scrutiny. Instead, it has opted to police language internally, enforce ideological conformity, and condemn without due diligence. When the Corporation insists that only one party bears responsibility, and instructs its reporters accordingly, it is no longer informing the public. It is persuading them. Why is it our national broadcaster seems so desperate to attack the one non-Israeli body which is doing the most to undermine the Hamas stranglehold over Gaza and its people? The closer the GHF and Israeli army get to finally defeating the terrorists, the more shrill the BBC's insistence that the Jewish state is deliberately starving children. They have trouble believing a self-declared Islamic jihadist dictatorship might have designed this level of suffering and torture, but none in believing the Jewish democratic state did so. The BBC is publicly funded and legally obligated to remain impartial. This latest leaked email suggests it is failing in that duty. As ever, there is virtually no chance the organisation will admit, redress or be penalised for this failing. They never are.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Council introduces anti-terror gates to town park
A local council says it is in the process of installing two new gates on the entrances to a town park, to comply with a newly-enacted anti-terrorism Town Park has been identified as a site that meets the criteria for the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill, also known as Martyn's legislation is named after Martyn Hett, who was among 22 people killed in the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing in May leader Ian Thorn said "We have been preparing for the new legislation known as Martyn's Law and have been reviewing how we will ensure that we are prepared to meet the future legal requirements." Martyn's Law, requires venues with a capacity of 200 or more to have a plan in place in case of an attack on their Home Office said that "through the Act, qualifying premises and events should be better prepared and protected, ready to respond in the event of a terrorist attack." Local Councillor Mel Jacob said that with the park regularly used for music and other events, the town council had to respond to the new legislation."We're all aware of those various incidents where vehicles have driven into people. We haven't had an incident of that type. We're just making sure we don't have one."The new gates will cost £3,000, a burden that will fall on local ratepayers."We didn't have a Martin's law pot of money. It's the same with any health and safety legislation. You've got to make sure you're compliant and obviously making sure people are safe is a key responsibility," Ms Jacob added.
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
India says its troops killed 3 suspected militants in Kashmir fighting
Indian troops killed three suspected militants in a gunfight in a forested area in disputed Kashmir, officials said Monday. The Indian military in a statement on social media said three militants were killed 'in an intense firefight' in the forested area in Dachigam area, some 30 kilometers (19-miles) northeast of the region's main city of Srinagar. Police Inspector-General Vidhi Kumar Birdi told reporters that the joint operation by the military, paramilitary and police was still ongoing. Officials did not give any other details. The Associated Press couldn't independently verify the details. Nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan each administer part of Himalayan Kashmir, but both claim the territory in its entirety. Militants in the Indian-controlled portion of Kashmir have been fighting New Delhi's rule since 1989. Many Muslim Kashmiris support the rebels' goal of uniting the territory, either under Pakistani rule or as an independent country. Tens of thousands of civilians, rebels and government forces have been killed in the conflict. Monday's incident is the second major gunfight since a gun massacre in the region in April that killed 26 people, mostly Hindu tourists, in Indian-controlled Kashmir. That led to tit-for-tat military strikes by India and Pakistan that brought the nuclear-armed rivals to the brink of their third war over the region. The Indian army also said in May that its soldiers killed three suspected militants in a gunfight. Before the April gun massacre in the Kashmiri resort town of Pahalgam, the fighting had largely ebbed in the region's Kashmir Valley, the heartland of anti-India rebellion and mainly shifted to mountainous areas of Jammu in the last few years. The massacre increased tensions between India and Pakistan, leading to the worst military confrontation in decades and the death of dozens of people until a ceasefire was reached on May 10 after U.S mediation. The region has simmered in anger since New Delhi ended the region's semi-autonomy in 2019 and drastically curbed dissent, civil liberties and media freedoms while intensifying counterinsurgency operations.
