Lawyer Basil Nabi says verdict may “politically strengthen” Imran ahead of polls; journalist Shahzeb Jillani says deep dislike of institutions for Imran now “well-established”.
After PTI founder Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi on Wednesday were sentenced to 14 years in jail in the Toshakhana reference by an accountability coiurt, legal experts and journalists criticised how the trial was carried out, albeit adding that the verdict against the two was “expected” and came as no surprise.
A day earlier, a special court established under the Official Secrets Act had sentenced Imran and foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi to 10 years in prison for leaking state secrets.
Previously, Imran was convicted in a separate Toshakhana case on August 5, 2023, and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. The Islamabad High Court (IHC) had suspended his sentence, however, a division bench had later rejected Imran’s petition seeking the suspension of the conviction.
Regarding the latest legal axe to fall on the PTI chief, this is what the experts Dawn.com spoke had to say:
Verdict gives impression that a deadline is being met: Basil Nabi Malik
Lawyer Basil Nabi Malik said the “back-to-back convictions … on back-to-back days” were “shocking to those who know not and quite expected for those who claim to know a bit too much.”
He said the verdict, “similar to the case in the cipher matter”, was rushed and gave an impression of “an impending deadline being met”.
Malik said a discussion on the merits of the decision would be premature without reading the detailed verdict itself but a few things were “certain”.
“Firstly, very few will consider this judgment credible, he said. “Secondly, overreliance on procedural straitjackets provides impetus to the opinion that the merits of the case must not have been sufficiently strong.
“Thirdly, any verdict given without affording the accused a fair opportunity to present his defence or cross the prosecution witnesses will always be shrouded in whispers of a kangaroo court proceeding.
“Fourthly, and perhaps most importantly, rather than hurting Imran Khan, this may well politically strengthen him for the upcoming elections,” the lawyer said.
Victimization turning Imran into mythical character: Shahzeb Jillani
Journalist Shahzeb Jillani said the way the trials against Imran were conducted and their subsequent verdicts made a “mockery of our judicial process”.
He added that “the deep dislike for Imran Khan among state institutions is now well-established. At first, it seemed like they just wanted to cut him down to size. Now, it’s clear that the aim was to demolish his politics completely.
“They think they are punishing him for his transgressions. But the brazen victimisation over the last year or so is turning him into a mythical character in the public imagination as sympathy for him grows — even among people highly critical of his divisive and confrontational politics.”
Judge did not disappoint gossipmongers: Arifa Noor
Anchor and journalist Arifa Noor, too, said the sentence was “expected” after what had transpired a day earlier.
“Yesterday evening, while news channels were commenting on the quick decision in the cipher case, the Toshakhana case was being heard in Adiala Jail and the general perception was that the conviction would come in a similar manner.”
She added that the judge in the Toshakhana case “did not disappoint the gossipmongers or the analysts”.
Toshakhana verdict undermines people’s faith in justice: Rida Hosain
Meanwhile, lawyer Rida Hosain said that just a day ago, Imran and Qureshi were denied the right to be represented by a counsel of their choice and convicted in the cipher case.
She added that the right to cross-examine prosecution witnesses was closed “as per reports” in the Toshakhana reference.
Hosain questioned: “What is the extreme urgency, and why are verdicts being pronounced in complete disregard of fair trial and due process rights?
“The Toshakhana verdict has little to do with the law. It undermines people’s faith in the justice system when the law is weaponised, and fundamental rights are ignored.”
Hosain said that past wrongs could not and should not be used to “legitimise obvious injustice”.
