ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court on Friday appointed court clerk Sakina Bangash to investigate the denial of a meeting between former prime minister Imran Khan and lawyer Mashal Yousafzai.
Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan made the appointment while hearing a petition seeking contempt of court proceedings against jail authorities for denying Ms Yousafzai access to Imran Khan. However, the jail authorities informed the court that the incarcerated PTI founder had not consented to the meeting when her name was sent to him.
The judge directed the Adiala Jail authorities to facilitate the court clerk’s visit to ascertain the facts.
Mashal Yousafzai, who appeared in court alongside her lawyer Shoaib Shaheen, argued that multiple petitions had been filed on the matter but were assigned to a different court.
LHC grants ECP more time to file reply in ex-PM’s jail trial case
The state counsel presented a handwritten list of lawyers allegedly provided by the PTI founder, indicating his refusal to meet certain individuals. However, the court questioned the validity of this claim, noting that jail authorities had previously assured the court that the meeting would take place.
Justice Khan expressed dissatisfaction with the jail authorities’ conduct, noting that the petitioner had been denied access despite clear court directives.
The court directed that Imran Khan be presented via video link at 2pm or in person at 3pm, warning that failure to comply would prompt action by the Islamabad police chief.
The court also addressed concerns regarding whether Mashal Yousafzai was indeed Imran Khan’s legal representative, suggesting that the PTI founder provide a written statement confirming or denying her status as his lawyer.
Justice Khan emphasised that the jail authorities’ repeated non-compliance amounted to contempt of court.
When the hearing resumed, Jail Superintendent Abdul Ghafoor Anjum appeared before the court and was questioned about the delay in arranging meetings. He stated that he had been out of town and that Imran Khan had refused to meet Ms Yousafzai.
However, Justice Khan highlighted inconsistencies in the authorities’ responses and reaffirmed the court’s commitment to ensuring justice.
Advocate General for Islamabad Ayaz Shaukat later appeared and informed the court that Imran Khan could not be presented via video link due to security concerns.
Justice Khan directed the jail authorities and Islamabad IG to submit affidavits detailing their compliance with the court orders.
Sakina Bangash is required to visit Adiala Jail, meet the PTI founder and confirm whether Ms Yousafzai is his legal representative. She was also instructed to inquire whether the PTI founder’s meetings with his associates are being arranged as per legal provisions.
List of lawyers
During the proceedings, a list of six lawyers signed by the PTI founder was presented before the court, raising further questions about whether the power of attorney was lawfully signed.
The jail superintendent informed the court that a meeting between Imran Khan, his wife Bushra Bibi, and their legal team was scheduled for Tuesday.
Expressing concerns about the fairness of the process, Mashal Yousafzai questioned whether justice would be served.
In response, Justice Khan reassured her, stating: “The court is here to ensure justice. That is why we are taking these steps to verify the facts and uphold the rule of law.”
The proceedings were adjourned until March 21 with directives for the court clerk to complete the inquiry and present its findings in the next hearing.
Jail trial
The Lahore High Court on Friday allowed more time to the Election Commission of Pakistan to file a reply to a petition of PTI founding chairman Imran Khan challenging his jail trial in a contempt case by the ECP.
When a three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Aalia Neelum resumed hearing on the petition, the ECP counsel explained the reason for delay in submission of the reply, saying that certain documents needed to be included in the case record.
He sought more time to furnish the reply.
The bench expressed displeasure over the non-submission of reply by the ECP, but allowed the request and adjourned the hearing.
Justice Shehram Sarwar Chaudhry and Justice Asjad Javaid Ghural were other members of the bench.
The petition filed by Imran Khan contended that the ECP had on Nov 30, 2023 passed the impugned order to conduct the trial at Adiala Jail on account of unspecified security concerns. It said the ECP failed to appreciate that a jail trial would violate several fundamental rights of the petitioner, adding that the commission incorrectly held that it can order a trial in secret and in jail.
The petition argued that a jail trial was a violation of Article 10-A of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to fair trial and due process of law. The petitioner asked the court to set aside the ECP decision and direct it to hold an open and public trial with full access to his legal team, media and the public.
Wajih Ahmad Sheikh in Lahore also contributed to this report
Published in Dawn, March 15th, 2025
