IHC warns of shifting Imran's trial premises

After the cancellation of the degree of a judge by Karachi University, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has passed two extraordinary orders in the last two days which may upset the incumbent government.

On Wednesday, IHC Justice Ejaz Ishaq Khan warned that if Adiala Jail authorities did not allow lawyers to represent Imran Khan in the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) case, the court would move the judicial proceedings from the jail to other premises under the direct oversight of the IHC.

The order came a day after a bench led by Justice Babar Sattar, while hearing a case of a missing student, sought an affidavit from the Sector Commander of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Islamabad stating whether or not they were aware of the whereabouts of the missing student and whether or not any individuals attached with any of the 'respondents or working under their command/authority' were aware of the whereabouts of the detainee within a period of one week.

Although the IHC was set to resume its work at full strength next week following the end of the court's summer vacations, the two interim orders may irk the government.

PTI lawyer Chaudhry Faisal Hussain had approached the IHC saying that, although he was the counsel for Imran, he had not been allowed to represent him in the ongoing £190 million NAB reference case against the PTI founder and his wife Bushra Bibi, which is being heard inside the jail.

He had submitted that he and his co-counsel had been prevented from entering the courtroom at two consecutive hearings on August 29 and September 2 by the use of 'improper tactics'. He had claimed that this had been done despite clear IHC decisions that had held that a jail trial was an 'open trial'.

He had also stated that, irrespective of the trial being open or closed in jail, the right of the accused to counsel and legal representation was a fundamental right.

In response, the IHC order noted that the contentions raised by the counsel were of serious concern as the right to access to justice was being denied.

The court also issued notices to the superintendent and deputy superintendent of Adiala Jail to ensure that either of them was present on the next date of hearing. "Notice is to be conveyed through the office of the learned Advocate General, for which the office will immediately contact the learned Advocate General with reference to this order, with a request for him to personally call the respondents and convey the Court's order", the court stated.

"In case they are not present day after tomorrow with full instructions and ready to answer this petition, this Court will proceed on the basis that the allegations in the petition are correct and will have no option left but to consider other alternatives such as moving the NAB Court from jail premises to another premises under the direct sight of this court," it added.

"As this Court is hearing another writ petition in which the same issue is involved with respect to the Prison Rules and the said petition No.866 of 2024 is listed for day after tomorrow, this petition is also being listed for the said date", says the order.

The court also observed that the evidence recorded during proceedings held by the trial court in which the accused's counsels had not been present due to a ban on their entry would carry no significance.

The hearing of the case was adjourned until Sept 9.