IHC orders 'dignified' treatment of Imran
ihc
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has directed the Adiala Jail authorities to ensure meaningful human interaction, family access, exercise, reading material and other facilities for former prime minister Imran Khan and his wife, Bushra Imran.
The court held that lawful incarceration does not authorise the avoidable deprivation of human dignity.
Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro issued the directions while disposing of two connected petitions filed by Imran's sister, Aleema Khanum, and Bushra's daughter, Mubashra Khawar Maneka, concerning the conditions of confinement of their respective close relatives at Rawalpindi's Adiala Jail.
The court observed that a prisoner does not cease to be a person protected by the Constitution merely because he has been convicted and incarcerated. It held that rights relating to life, dignity, humane treatment and protection against treatment unauthorised by law continue to apply inside prison.
The court also rejected the objection that the petitions were not maintainable because criminal appeals against the convictions of Imran and Bushra were pending before the appellate court.
According to the 24-page judgment, the petitions did not challenge the convictions or sentences but concerned the manner and conditions in which the prisoners were being kept in custody.
A prison authority, the court held, derives its powers from law and remains subject to constitutional review when its treatment of prisoners is alleged to violate the Constitution, the Prisons Act, 1894 or the Pakistan Prison Rules, 1978.
The petitions had alleged that Imran Khan was being subjected to prolonged solitary confinement and incommunicado detention, while Bushra was allegedly being kept in complete isolation.
The petitioners claimed that the prisoners had been deprived of meaningful interaction with fellow inmates, family members and lawyers. The jail authorities, however, denied that either prisoner was being held in solitary confinement.
According to the report submitted by the Adiala Jail superintendent, Imran Khan was allowed to move during the day within a compound comprising seven cells while he interacted with prison officials and a convicted labourer, received medical visits and had access to natural light and exercise.
The authorities also said that he was allowed meetings with his wife and was regularly supplied newspapers and books of his choice.
The government maintained that ordinary prisoners were not allowed access to Imran Khan's place of confinement because of security considerations arising from his status as a former prime minister and head of a political party. Such restrictions, it argued, could not be treated as solitary confinement.
The court stopped short of recording an unqualified finding that Imran Khan and Bushra were undergoing solitary confinement in the strict statutory sense. It nevertheless held that the practical effect of prolonged restrictions on human interaction could not be ignored.
The judgment stated that the Pakistan Prison Rules distinguish between lawful separation and solitary confinement. While security and prison discipline may justify separation, such separation could not be allowed to degenerate into complete or prolonged social isolation without lawful authority.
"Security requirements may regulate such interaction; they cannot extinguish it altogether," it held. The court attached particular importance to medical records produced by the jail authorities themselves.
It noted that a consultant cardiologist from PIMS, who examined Imran Khan on August 1, recorded fluctuating blood pressure, palpitations, headache and restlessness.
The medical opinion associated his stress, among other factors, with infrequent meetings with his wife, family and social contacts and the non-availability of newspapers and television.
The medical consultant recommended measures to reduce mental stress, including more frequent meetings with his wife and provision of reading material.
A medical board that examined Imran Khan on August 10 also recorded anxiety and recommended a one-hour daily walk, relaxation in prison conditions, provision of magazines, newspapers, television and books, as well as more frequent human interaction with his immediate family and spouse.
The IHC observed that these medical records themselves recognised the adverse impact of restricted social and familial interaction on the prisoner's psychological and physical well-being.
"Incarceration necessarily entails curtailment of liberty, but it does not authorize avoidable deprivation of those incidents of human dignity which are compatible with lawful custody," the judgment said.
The court directed the jail superintendent to ensure that Imran was permitted prescribed meetings with his wife and reasonable meetings with family members in accordance with the Prison Rules.
It also directed the jail authorities to facilitate scheduled audio and video communication, including WhatsApp calls, between Imran Khan and his sons at reasonable intervals, subject to security arrangements.
The court clarified that the facility was intended exclusively for private familial communication.
If the jail authorities found that a call was being recorded, disseminated, broadcast or used for political campaigning or another purpose inconsistent with prison discipline, they could suspend the facility, provided reasons were recorded in writing and the action remained subject to law.
The court further ordered that Imran Khan be allowed at least one hour daily for walking and physical exercise, consistent with the medical board's advice.
Meaningful human interaction was also to be facilitated in a manner compatible with security and prison discipline. The jail administration could regulate the identity, number, timing and place of such interaction, but security concerns could not be used as a blanket justification for complete deprivation of human association.
The court ordered that newspapers, magazines and permitted reading material be regularly supplied to the prisoner. It specifically directed that several books sought to be provided to Imran Khan be delivered after ordinary security scrutiny.
The court said no book should be withheld merely because of its intellectual, religious, historical or academic subject matter unless prohibited by law or found, for recorded reasons, to compromise prison security or discipline. A functional television facility was also ordered to be provided in accordance with the Prison Rules and the medical board's recommendation.
The court extended the same principles to Bushra, directing the jail authorities to ensure that she was not subjected to conditions amounting to unlawful solitary confinement and that she was afforded permissible family and legal meetings, exercise, reading and meaningful human interaction, subject to lawful security requirements.
The court clarified that its directions did not confer any privilege beyond what the law permitted, but were intended to ensure that incarceration remained within the limits prescribed by the Constitution, the Prisons Act and the Pakistan Prison Rules.
It ordered the superintendent to submit a compliance report within 15 days of receiving the order.