Terrorism charges case: IHC orders Imran to join probe

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday ordered Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan to join investigation of case for allegedly threatening Additional District and Sessions Judge Zeba Chaudhry and top officials of the Islamabad Police.

IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Saman Rafat heard PTI’s plea to dismiss the terrorism case registered against the party chairman. The court stopped the Islamabad Police from submitting a challan against Imran in an anti-terrorism court and ordered that investigation officer to submit a report in the court and after getting statement should determine whether terrorism charges were applicable or not.

The chief justice also directed the PTI chairman to ensure that he cooperates with the federal capital’s police in the investigation of the case otherwise “law will take its own course”.

The chief justice said that a constable in uniform was the State, and if a mistake had been committed by the police the court would decide about that. “How we would ensure implementation on law when we don’t obey it. These are not some gentlemen standing before you, their uniforms are to be respected; they are symbols of the State,” remarked IHC CJ as he asked Imran to cooperate.

During the hearing, Imran’s counsel Barrister Ali Zafar informed the two-member bench that the police had added three new sections to the FIR registered against his client. The lawyer then pleaded with the court to stop the police from taking disciplinary action until next week.

The court then asked the police whether they had submitted a challan in the terrorism case in the ATC as of yet. Islamabad Advocate General Jahangir Jadoon informed the bench that Khan isn’t getting involved in the investigation.

“The police aren’t being given access to Imran Khan [...] and this case is linked to Shahbaz Gill,” the advocate general informed the court. The IHC CJ then said that this was a test case for the investigation officer (IO), and in case there is any offence which has been mistakenly added, he should remove it himself.

The chief justice said nobody was above the law and instructed the police to tell the court if anyone didn’t cooperate with the IO. “The law will make its way in the case. But why is there a need to form a joint investigation team? What evidence is there except for a speech?” the IHC CJ wondered.

Following the arguments, the court directed the police to submit a report first in the case before it files a challan in the ATC. The bench then adjourned the hearing till September 15. A first information report (FIR) was registered against the former prime minister in August under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) for threatening the additional sessions judge and senior police officers of the Islamabad Police at a rally in the federal capital’s F-9 Park.

The FIR was registered on the complaint of magistrate Ali Javed at Islamabad’s Margalla Police Station under Section 7 of ATA. Following this, Khan managed to secure transit bail till August 25 from the IHC but was asked to approach the ATC as it was the relevant forum. Then, the trial court extended the interim bail till September 12 in the terrorism case.

The IHC, meanwhile, dismissed a PTI plea seeking the acceptance of resignations of party’s members of the National Assembly in one go. IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah heard the case filed by the PTI challenging the acceptance of resignations of 11 MNAs and not accepting a “piece-meal” resignation of all 123 lawmakers.

The IHC CJ declared former NA deputy speaker Qasim Suri’s resignation acceptance order void and ordered every MNA to appear before the NA speaker in person to get their resignation accepted.

Justice Minallah observed that the deputy speaker had no right to accept the resignations. The chief justice remarked that the Speaker was satisfied with the resignations of 11 MNAs and the court was not authorised to judge the verification standard of Speaker.

He said “this court will not issue orders to the speaker of the assembly,” adding that “what the deputy speaker [Suri] did was against the law.” Counsel for the PTI Faisal Chaudhry said that the Speaker was elected by a minority, so they were not going to appear before him.

Justice Minallah remarked that they had to change their mindset and respect Parliament. He said the court respects the elected representatives of the public. The PTI counsel said he wanted to furnish arguments on the Supreme Court’s verdict in connection to the case.

“This court gives you this opinion that you should go to the Supreme Court,” the IHC CJ responded. IHC CJ Minallah also rejected PTI lawyer Faisal Chaudhry’s plea to take up the case with a larger bench.

Two days after PTI Chairman Imran Khan was ousted as the prime minister — through a no-confidence motion moved by the then-opposition — all PTI MNAs resigned en masse on April 11. Suri — who was performing his duties as the acting NA speaker after Asad Qaiser resigned as the speaker — had accepted all the resignations on April 15.

However, once Raja Pervez Ashraf was appointed as the speaker, he decided to verify the resignations of all MNAs by interviewing them individually. The decision was taken after reports that several resignations submitted by the lawmakers were typed and not handwritten — which is against the NA’s rules.

PTI Secretary-General Asad Umar — on behalf of his party — had filed a plea in the IHC on August 1 after the NA speaker accepted the resignations of 11 MNAs. In the petition, the PTI leader demanded that all 123 MNAs should be de-notified together and their seats are declared vacant.