Govt wants to pursue contempt case against Imran, SC told

ISLAMABAD: The government remains committed to pursuing the contempt case against Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan, Additional Attorney General (AAG) Amir Rehman informed the Supreme Court during a hearing on Tuesday. The case pertains to alleged violations of court orders during the PTI’s May 25, 2022, long march.

The federal government had filed the petition accusing the PTI founder of breaching the court's directives related to the protest. A seven-member constitutional bench, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan and including Justices Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Naeem Akhtar Afghan, and Shahid Bilal Hassan, heard the case.

Justice Aminuddin questioned whether the government intended to pursue the case seriously, to which AAG Rehman affirmed the government's commitment. Rehman argued that Imran Khan had violated the court's order during the long march.

Justice Aminuddin noted that if a notice were issued, Imran Khan would need to appear in person. He directed the AAG to seek instructions on presenting the detained former prime minister before the court. Justice Mandokhail reminded that contempt cases are strictly between the court and the accused and urged all parties to remain composed.

Salman Akram Raja, representing Imran Khan, stated that his client had already submitted a response. He explained that the verbal court order had not reached Khan due to disruptions in mobile services, hindering communication with the legal team. When Justice Hilali asked if a notice had been served, Raja confirmed that the response was filed only after the notice was received.

The bench then adjourned the hearing indefinitely.

Imran Khan had called for the march to Islamabad following his ouster through a no-confidence vote by the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) coalition earlier in 2022.

Court to Hear May 9 Inquiry Plea

In a separate case concerning a judicial commission to investigate the May 9, 2023, violence, Imran Khan's lawyer, Hamid Khan, addressed the court. He requested a thorough inquiry, stating that more than 18 months had passed without clarity on the events of that day. He also highlighted that hundreds of cases had been registered and an entire political party was being sidelined.

Justice Mandokhail questioned why the petitioner had not approached the high court first. Hamid Khan argued that the issue’s national significance required Supreme Court intervention. Though the Registrar’s Office had objected, claiming the matter lacked public interest, the bench allowed the case to proceed.

Justice Aminuddin overruled the procedural objections but reminded the lawyer that substantive arguments must be presented when the case is rescheduled. AAG Rehman noted that the claim of public interest was yet to be debated.

The court adjourned the hearing indefinitely, with Justice Mandokhail emphasizing that legal matters, such as FIRs, would ultimately be decided by the courts. Justice Hilali added that even if a judicial commission were formed, it would only determine responsibility, without affecting ongoing criminal cases.

Civilians’ Military Trials Case Adjourned

The same bench also heard the case concerning the trial of civilians in military courts. The AAG requested an adjournment due to the absence of Khawaja Haris, the Ministry of Defence’s counsel, who was unwell.

Accepting the request, the bench postponed the hearing until Thursday. During the session, advocate Latif Khosa’s plea to transfer detainees to regular prisons was denied. However, Justice Aminuddin assured that arrangements could be made for detainees to meet their families, as previously promised by the Attorney General.

Justice Aminuddin advised Khosa to stay focused on the case at hand and avoid digressing from the main issue.