Home TRENDING IN THE CYPHER CASE, IMRAN’S COURT REMAND HAS BEEN PROLONGED TILL SEPTEMBER...

IN THE CYPHER CASE, IMRAN’S COURT REMAND HAS BEEN PROLONGED TILL SEPTEMBER 13.

IN THE CYPHER CASE, IMRAN'S COURT REMAND HAS BEEN PROLONGED TILL SEPTEMBER 13.

SHARE

In a case involving the illegal possession and disclosure of a classified diplomatic cipher during the latter stages of his term as prime minister, Imran Khan has been remanded in judicial custody until September 13 by a special court recently established in ISLAMABAD to hear cases filed under the Official Secrets Act, 1923.

Security officers escort Pakistan’s former Prime Minister Imran Khan, as he appeared in Islamabad High Court, Islamabad, Pakistan May 12, 2023. REUTERS/Akhtar Soomro

Imran Khan has been detained in Punjab’s Attock Jail since August 5. On Wednesday, a hearing was held there, and notifications were given regarding his post-arrest bail plea.

The three-year sentence handed down to PTI Chairman Imran Khan in the Toshakhana case was suspended by the Islamabad High Court (IHC) the day before. After the former prime minister posted a Rs100,000 surety bail in court on Wednesday, an order for his release was sent to Attock Jail.

However, Imran’s arrest in the diplomatic cipher case was announced by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) on Tuesday, purportedly just after the IHC judgment suspending his sentence in the gifts case.

After receiving word from the Ministry of Law, Special Court Judge Abul Hasnat Muhammad Zulqarnain heard the cipher case on Wednesday inside Attock Jail. Salman Safdar, Ahmed Musarrat, and Intizar Panjutha argued on behalf of Imran Khan, who was present in court.

The PTI leader’s legal team has asked for bail, argued that the Ministry of Law’s notification that his trial will take place in jail is invalid, and insisted that the proceedings against their client be held in public.

They said that the case against Imran Khan under the Official Secrets Act, of 1923 was politically motivated and based on falsified claims.

On September 2, the judge issued notices regarding Imran’s bail application and requested that the prosecution produce evidence in their case.

Meanwhile, the PTI leader contested the Ministry of Law’s notice that his trial would take place in the IHC’s confines.

Judge Abul Hasnat Muhammad Zulqarnain of the Islamabad Anti-Terrorism Court-1 (ATC) was appointed by the ministry to preside over cases brought under the Official Secret Act, 1923, but he filed a petition challenging the appointment.

The PTI chairman claimed the judge lacked the necessary qualifications to preside over the case.

Former premier Imran had taken out a piece of paper, allegedly a diplomatic cipher, and displayed it at a public gathering in Islamabad on March 27, 2022, claiming it was evidence of a “international conspiracy” to topple his government, which led to his removal.

On July 19, the FIA began its investigation into the so-called ‘cypher-gate’ after the PML-N-led coalition government declared an official inquiry against the former PM and his close collaborators for violating the Official Secrets Act, 1923 by making a classified document public.

On August 19, the FIA arrested Shah Mahmood Qureshi, the vice chairman of the PTI and the country’s foreign minister while the PTI was in power.

Imran Khan was questioned for almost an hour by the FIA Counter Terrorism Wing on August 26 at Attock Jail. On August 29, the agency confirmed that Imran had been arrested.

The PTI claims it is illegal to hold Imran’s trial behind bars.

On Wednesday, the PTI announced its intention to challenge Imran Khan’s trial in the cipher matter inside of Attock Jail, citing the violation of the former prime minister’s fundamental rights as the basis for its action.

After lengthy discussion, the PTI’s core committee settled on the word “unlawful” to describe Imran’s trial behind bars. The former ruling party also spoke out against the court remand of the party leader.

The trial was a result of Imran’s “unwavering commitment” to national sovereignty and his “resolute refusal” to cave to external forces, the committee said, citing his “absolutely not” reaction to the United States as an example.

SHARE