IHC clubs pleas against cipher case trial

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) clubbed together various petitions filed by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan relating to the ongoing cipher case trial by a special court established under the Official Secrets Act (OSA).

During the hearings, IHC Chief Justice Aamir Farooq remarked that he would issue orders for clubbing these petitions including the plea for dismissal of the cipher case. He also said that Imran’s plea for his bail would be heard separately.

Imran had sought dismissal of the cipher case and, through another petition, the stay against the special court’s decision to indict him on October 17. The chief justice said that he would issue the order after looking at the relevant rules.

During the hearing of Imran’s bail application in the cipher case, PTI’s lawyers Barrister Salman Safdar and Niazullah Niazi concluded their arguments. After them, Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) prosecutor Zulfiqar Abbas Naqvi opened his arguments.

Prosecutors Raja Rizwan Abbasi and Shah Khawar also appeared in the court for the hearing. Senor lawyer Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan and Imran Khan’s sister Aleema Khan and others were also present in the courtroom.

The cipher case pertained to a document that Imran, then the prime minister, waved at a public rally in Islamabad in March last year, claiming that it was the evidence of a foreign conspiracy to remove him from the government through the then opposition’s no-confidence motion.

At the outset of the hearing, the special prosecutor requested the court to hear all the cases together. He added that the copies of the indictment in the cipher case were provided to the accused on October 9, but their lawyers were not allowing the trial to proceed.

Imran’s lawyers told the court that their petition against the trial inside the jail was pending in the court. The chief justice said that the decision on the petition against the jail trial would be issued by Monday.

He added that Imran’s bail plea would be heard separately.

Continuing his arguments on the bail application, Barrister Safdar said that Imran was a political prisoner. He said that the OSA was for the armed forces and it had never been used against any former prime minister in the past.

The lawyer stressed that the law dealt with sharing information with the enemy, while Imran was accused of keeping the cipher and twisting it. The first information report (FIR) against Imran said that cipher was to be recovered from him.

The lawyer made it a point that when the cipher was not recovered, how did the prosecution know that it was tampered with. He also said that cipher came to the foreign ministry, but it was not the complainant in the case, rather the complainant was the interior ministry.

Barrister Safdar said that the cipher, which came on March 7, had been discussed in the National Security Committee (NSC) as well as the federal cabinet. It was again taken up in the NSC meeting in April, when Shehbaz Sharif was the prime minister.

He continued that five months later, the cabinet informed the FIA that the cipher was missing from the Prime Minister House and six days later, the FIA opened an inquiry. So, he asked, if the cipher was in the Prime Minister House, should Shahbaz Sharif be an accused in this case?

He also referred to former prime minister Imran Khan’s then principal secretary Azam Khan. The lawyer argued that it was the responsibility of his office to maintain records. So if this criminal act, allegedly by Imran, was known to Azam Khan, why he was not the complainant.

Later, Special Prosecutor Rizwan Abbasi started his arguments saying that the law applied to whatever happened in the service. He said that the OSA was made part of the Army Act in 1960, so there could be a trial in the military court, but it was not necessary.

The court inquired that if a prime minister, president, governor could not reveal official secrets throughout their life, the prosecutor replied in affirmative. He also said that the cipher was a secret document and no one could keep it with himself. Later the hearing was adjourned till Monday.

Separately, during the hearing of the petition against Imran’s indictment in the cipher case next week, PTI’s lawyer Sardar Latif Khosa told the court that an application pertaining to the case was pending in the IHC and the judgment had been reserved.

The chief justice remarked that one miscellaneous application was filed on Thursday that could be heard with the main case. Khosa requested the court to fix the hearing before October 17 – the date of Imran’s indictment. The chief justice said he would issue order and the case would be heard before 17th.

Meanwhile, another PTI lawyer Sher Afzal Marwat appeared in the court and said that the defence side had not receive the copies of the case, but the trial court had written that copies had been received.

He added that they had petitioned the IHC on that matter.

The lawyer requested the court to remove the Registrar Office’s objection to their application. The chief justice assured the PTI lawyer that he would remove the objection, but first the court would see to the relevant rules.

Separately, heading a two-member bench with Justice Babar Sattar, Chief Justice Aamer Farooq head Imran’s petition against the rejection of bail pleas in the £190 million corruption case and Toshakhana case investigation by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB)

Meanwhile, an Islamabad Civil judge ordered PTI’s lawyer Sher Afzal Marwat to present arguments in the case of illegal marriage of Imran and Bushra Bibi. Marwat did not appear in the court during a hearing on Thursday. The hearing was adjourned till October 23.