CM Afridi defends Kasim’s remarks at UNHRC as son’s natural concern for his father

Criticises federal govt over democracy, human rights, and economic management

Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi addresses the media in Islamabad on Sunday. Screengrab: PTI/X

ISLAMABAD:

Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi on Sunday defended the recent statement by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan’s son, Kasim Khan, at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), describing it as a natural expression of concern for his father rather than a political act.

Earlier this week, Kasim Khan had urged the UNHRC to intervene and press the Pakistani government for the immediate release of his father.

He highlighted several alleged violations, including arbitrary detention, solitary confinement, denial of medical care, restricted family visits, and the trial of civilians in military courts, asserting that these actions contravened Pakistan’s obligations under the European Union’s Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP Plus) framework.

In response, Information Minister Attaullah Tarar accused the PTI and Imran Khan’s family of acting against Pakistan’s national and economic interests, claiming that Kasim Khan’s statement undermined the country’s GSP Plus trade status.

Read More: Bushra Bibi undergoes eye check-up in Adiala Jail

The Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FPCCI) also condemned the remarks, describing them as a “negative propaganda campaign” against Pakistan’s position with the EU.

FPCCI Senior Vice President Saqib Fayyaz Magoon noted that the 2023 extension of GSP Plus status reflected Pakistan’s compliance with international law, with government institutions and the business community aligned with EU standards.

Speaking to the media in Islamabad on Sunday, Afridi criticised attempts to link Kasim’s comments to the GSP Plus agreement, calling such reports a misrepresentation. He said the conversation, translated into Urdu to clarify context, reflected a son’s natural concern for his father and had no political connotations.

Load Next Story