PTI leaders disavow controversial tweet

Gohar, Raoof get IHC relief; to record statements before FIA

ISLAMABAD :

Senior Pakistan Tehreek-e- Insaf (PTI) leaders, includ- ing Chairman Gohar Khan and Information Secretary Raoof Hasan, have distanced themselves from a contro- versial tweet about Shaikh Mujeebur Rehman posted from the PTI’s official X handle last month.

Gohar and Raoof appeared before the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) investigation team after the Islamabad High Court (IHC) prohibited the agency from harassing them. However, PTI Secretary General Omar Ayub did not attend the inquiry.

According to the Express News, Barrister Gohar failed to justify the contro- versial video during the in- quiry, while Raoof Hasan attributed it to the party’s social media team, operated by Jibran Ilyas and Azhar Mashwani from abroad.

According to the Express News, Barrister Gohar was questioned for two hours, and Raoof Hasan for four

LAHORE. Pakistan Tehreek-e- Insaf (PTI) activist Sanam Javed was rearrested
on Wednesday by the Gujranwala police in a sep- arate case, as soon as her release order reached the Sargodha jail, where she had been incarcerated for over a year in cases related to riots on May 9 2023.

Sanam’s father had filed a habeas corpus petition in Lahore High Court (LHC), seeking recovery of his daughter from “illegal detention” of the jail authorities.

Sargodha jail authorities admitted in the LHC that they received “Robkar”
— release order — in the case in which she had secured bail from an anti- terrorism court.

hours during the inquiry. Quoting sources, the report revealed that Gohar told the inquiry officer he did not know who was operating the PTI’s social media account.

Regarding the controver- sial video’s content, Gohar stated that he completely disagreed with its message, emphasizing that conflicts should not escalate to such an extent and advocating for a peaceful resolution.

Gohar then confirmed that Jibran Ilyas and Azhar Mashwani managed the social media accounts from abroad and were primarily responsible for the party’s social media policy and video production.

According to the sources, Barrister Gohar Ali Khan was asked why the party had handed over its social media policy to the people sitting on foreign soil. On that, the Express News report said, he could not give a satisfac- tory explanation, saying that the matter had been settled before his joining the party.

Rauf Hasan, according to the Express News report,

Gohar confirmed that Jibran Ilyas and Azhar Mashwani ran PTI’s social media accounts from abroad

told the inquiry officials that the head of social media was Jibran Ilyas, who lived in America and held the re- sponsibility for the tweet. He expressed his ignorance about the basis for uploading the controversial video.

According to another source, Hasan was asked what parallels were being drawn by putting a picture of the current military leader- ship. On that Hasan replied that he would bring these matters to the notice of the party founder and get the answers from him.

IHC relief

Earlier, Barrister Gohar and Raoof Hasan got major relief from the IHC on their peti- tions, challenging the FIA notices to them following the controversial tweet. Thecourt ordered the FIA not to take action against them.

The petition, along with the objections raised by the IHC registrar, was taken up before Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani. At the out- set of the hearing, Justice Kayani told the petitioners that the registrar’s office had the objection that both complaint and FIA notice had been challenged.

It was stated that the complaint would be seen at the relevant forum. Representing the petition- ers, lawyer Niazullah Niazi took the stand that a notice had been sent by the FIA Cyber Crime Wing (CCW) on a complaint filed on May 29. The counsel appre- hended that the FIA might arrest his clients.

Justice Kayani enquired whether the petitioners handled the twitter account involved in the matter. Niazi replied that this account was not handled by the pe- titioners. The court then re- marked that if they were not operating the account, then they could say that.