—– Issues notices to the respondents
Islamabad: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday sought responses from the law ministry and other respondents on PTI Chairman Imran Khan’s plea against the recent decision to move the cipher case hearing from Islamabad to Attock Jail. The special court was recently established to hear the case against Imran.
It comes a day after the former premier had filed a petition in the court on the matter — hours after his cipher case hearing was held in the office of the deputy superintendent of the Attock district jail, where he is currently incarcerated after his conviction in the Toshakhana graft case.
The cipher case pertains to a diplomatic document which reportedly went missing from Imran’s possession. The PTI alleges that it contained a threat from the United States to oust Imran from power. Proceedings against Shah Mahmood Qureshi, the PTI vice chairman and former foreign minister, are also under way in the same case.
The PTI chief had also challenged the appointment of Judge Abual Hasnat Zulqarnain, an anti-terrorism court (ATC) judge, to the special court, which was formed to hear cases filed under the Official Secrets Act, 1923.
On Tuesday, hours after the IHC suspended Imran’s sentence in the Toshkhana case, the special court had directed the Attock jail authorities to keep him in “judicial lockup” and produce him the next day in connection with the cipher case.
The same night, a notification issued by the law ministry said the interior ministry had conveyed “security concerns” to it in a letter and that the Law and Justice Division had “no objection” to Imran’s trial in the cipher case being held at Attock jail.
Subsequently, a day ago, Judge Zulqarnain presided over an in-camera hearing of the cipher case against Imran at the jail, where he extended the ex-premier’s judicial remand till September 13.
Today, IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq presided over the hearing on the plea with objections while Advocate Sher Afzal Marwat appeared before the court as Imran’s counsel.
The hearing
At the outset of the hearing, Marwat informed the IHC that two objections had been raised by the court’s registrar upon the fil-ing of the petition.
He then explained that one of them was that “more than one request” had been made in the same petition. At this, the chief jus-tice asked, “Why does it matter? “I can remove the objections [if] you present arguments on merit,” he added.
Justice Farooq then asked: “Was the court venue shifted?” The PTI lawyer answered that the court designated to hear cases filed under the Secrets Act was that of a magistrate.
“Authorising an anti-terrorism court judge to hear cases filed under the Official Secrets Act is wrong,” Marwat asserted.
He then urged the court to issue notices to the respondents seeking their response on the matter, which the chief justice allowed.
Marwat then requested the court to fix the next hearing for the coming week as it was an urgent matter, to which Justice Farooq agreed and adjourned the hearing till the next week.
The date for the next hearing has yet to be finalised.
The petition
Imran moved the IHC after the hearing at Attock Jail on August 20. The petition, was filed through PTI lawyer Sher Afzal Marwat and named the state through the law ministry secretary; the interior ministry secretary; the FIA director general; the Islama-bad chief commissioner, deputy commissioner and inspector general of police; the Adiala and Attock jail superintendents; and Judge Zulqarnain as respondents in the case.
The application also raised objections to the law ministry’s notification allowing the trial to be heard in prison.
It alleged that the special court judge was “lacking the essential qualification” for the role, citing the qualification of an ATC judge had been defined under section 13(2) of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997.
“Therefore, reducing the rank and status of learned administrative judge ATC 1, Islamabad to the status of a magistrate is a mockery of the law and void-ab-initio,” it added.
It went on to state that an ATC judge was defined under Sections 13 (establishment of ATC) and 14 (composition and appoint-ment of presiding officers of ATCs) of the ATA, according to which, the presiding judge of an ATC, “under no stretch of imagina-tion, could be a magistrate”.
The petition further said that the appointment was “contrary to law” and “void-ab-initio” as the special court judge was not a magistrate under section 4(m-a) of the CrPC, which defines a magistrate.
Detailing the grounds against the moving of the special court to the Attock jail, the plea said the production order issued by the judge was a “judicial order, which has neither been recalled nor reviewed” by the court concerned.
It added that the respondents were not vested with any such powers under section 9(2) (court of session) of the CrPC. Citing the “security concerns” conveyed by the interior ministry, the petition argued that the “respondents never considered” allowing Im-ran to appear before any Islamabad court via video when he had expressed similar concerns.
“The claim in the name of security is a farce, false and misguiding,” it asserted, while also terming the notification “bereft of rea-soning, logic and non-speaking”.
While stating that the “right to fair trial, merit and justice and fair play demands” that the trial be “held openly with access to all incendiary”, the plea suggested that “if in any case, the respondents wanted to hide things from the public, the in-camera hearing trial of the petitioner” could be held at the court building in the FJC.
The petition further said that the cipher case was at its pre-trial stage, at which the venue of the trial could not be changed. It add-ed that the law ministry had no authority to extend its jurisdiction to Punjab and determine a venue that does not lie within the federal government’s administrative control.
Moreover, Former prime minister and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chief Imran Khan, who has been imprisoned at Attock jail since August 5, was on Thursday granted permission by a special court to speak to his sons.
Khan, who is in judicial custody till September 13 in cipher case, has been incarcerated in Attock prison since his arrest on Au-gust 05 after a trial convicted him in the Toshakhana case.
He was taken into custody and shifted to prison the same day after he was convicted by a trial court in the federal capital on graft charges.
On August 29, the Islamabad High Court suspended the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf chief’s sentence in the Toshakahana case. While he was in Attock jail, the special court sent him on judicial remand on August 16 which was then extended by another 14 days.
The PTI chief, through his lawyers Umair Niazi and Shiraz Ahmed filed a petition before Judge Abul Hasnat Zulqarnain seek-ing permission to talk to his sons Qasim and Sulaiman on the telephone.
“I want to talk to my sons Qasim and Sulaiman on the telephone or via WhatsApp,” he pleaded, which was approved by the court.
The judge directed the Attock Jail officials to make arrangements for the father to speak to the sons over the phone. –Agencies
