Imran, Qureshi denied bail in cypher case

Court says sufficient incriminating evidence available against accused

ISLAMABAD:

A special court has rejected the post-arrest bail applications of PTI Chairman Imran Khan and Vice Chairman Shah Mahmood Qureshi in the diplomatic cypher case, noting that “sufficient incriminating evidence is available on record to connect the accused with the instant case”.

“[The] record further depicts that there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the accused/petitioners are guilty of the offence [under] sections 5 and 9 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 in the light of the content of the instant FIR [First information Report].

“Moreover, there are also reasonable grounds for believing that the accused/petitioners have committed a non-bailable offence. The record which is in color of various documents is sufficient for the purpose of discarding the bails of both the accused,” said a 7-page written order.

Read Cypher saga

Earlier, counsels for the PTI leaders and the Federal Investigation Agency’s (FIA) prosecutors presented their arguments before Judge Abual Hasnat Muhammad Zulqarnain of the Special Court, notified last month to hear cases filed under the Official Secrets Act, 1923.

On March 27, 2022, before facing a vote of no-confidence, former premier Imran had taken out a piece of paper–allegedly a diplomatic cypher–from his pocket and displayed it at a public gathering in Islamabad, claiming it was evidence of an "international conspiracy" to topple his government.

The FIA initiated its probe into the so-called “cypher-gate” on July 19 after the PML-N-led coalition government announced an official inquiry against the former PM and his close associates for violating the Official Secrets Act, 1923 for illegal possession of the classified document public.

The agency arrested Shah Mahmood Qureshi, who had served as the country’s foreign minister during the PTI’s rule, on August 19. An FIA Counter Terrorism Wing team interrogated Imran on August 26 inside Attock Jail in connection with the case. The agency announced Imran's arrest on August 29.

Imran and Qureshi later moved their bail applications in the special court.

Arguing in support of granting bail to his clients, PTI leaders' counsel Salman Safdar said the complainant in this case should have been the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as the foreign secretary had received the alleged cypher from Washington.

He said it is alleged that the former premier and his associates compromised national security. However, he said, first it must be established as to what the actual text of the cypher was and what was content shared later.

The lawyers asked the court as to where Azam Khan, the principal secretary to the PM during the PTI’s rule, was, adding that he was one of the main characters in the saga.

He also asked how national security was compromised by his clients.

“Prosecution must prove what harm was done to national security by the PTI chairman? It is alleged that the PTI chairman deliberately kept the cypher in his custody. The case is about incorrect placement and misuse of the cypher, but it is the prosecution's job to prove this,” he said.

The counsel said the case was part of a politically motivated vendetta. He said Imran Khan is the chairman of a major political party in this country.

“People usually start in politics at the age of 17, but according to the prosecution Imran Khan entered the world of crime at the age of 71,” he quipped. The special court judge said, "We need to determine where the document came from, where it went, and who had it."

Read Imran, Qureshi’s judicial remanded extended

Salman Safdar said his clients did nothing that could harm national security.

“The Official Secrets Act, 1923 does not apply in this case. What they did publicly was simply asserting that Pakistan is a sovereign country, and no one can interfere in its internal affairs. Is asserting Pakistan's sovereignty a breach of the law?”

Another member of Imran’s legal team, Babar Awan, said, “If the cipher had been stolen then how did the second cabinet meeting take place? Does it mean that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should remain silent if Pakistan receives threats from abroad?

He said the Ministry of Foreign Affairs initially placed the cipher in front of the cabinet. The cipher was sealed again after the meeting. According to the Constitution, the cipher was presented before the Federal cabinet and the National Security Committee.

“Reporting a foreign conspiracy against national security to the relevant forum is a responsibility. If the cipher was stolen then how did the National Security Committee hold a second meeting on it? This case is based on a concocted story,” he said.

Lawyer Shoaib Shaheen said, "The responsibility for the document lay with the PM’s principal secretary. Handling the documents that come to the Prime Minister's office is not the prime minister's responsibility; it is the responsibility of the principal secretary."

The prosecution, however, presented its arguments in-camera. After hearing the arguments, the court reserved its order which was unveiled later.

In the order, the court also noted that despite  its directives issued on September 11, the counsels for the petitioners did not make any correction in the footnote of a certificate.

 “[Therefore] this court [is] left with no option but to decide the instant bail applications due to non-compliance [of the court order] as well as on merit. Hence the instant post arrest bail applications of both the accused….stand dismissed.”

It further stated that in order to avoid any prejudicial design to the safety of the state for tentative assessment in future a restriction will be imposed on unnecessary or irrelevant persons in the courtroom during hearing of the case.

The PTI counsels expressed disappointment at the order and announced challenging it at the high court.