Staff Reporter
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Wednesday gave PTI chairman Imran Khan another chance to submit a “well-considered” response in the contempt proceedings initiated against him for his controversial remarks about district and sessions judge Zeba Chaudhry, who had approved his chief of staff, Shahbaz Gill’s physical remand in a sedition case.
The former prime minister was summoned by the court in his personal capacity at the last hearing, when the IHC had also issued a show-cause notice to him.
A five-member bench, comprising IHC Chief Justice (CJ) Athar Minallah, Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri and Justice Babar Sattar, heard the case today.
In its written order, a copy of which is available with Dawn.com, the IHC found Imran’s reply, submitted yesterday, to be “unsatisfactory”.
“The learned counsel for the respondent sought further time to file a supplementary reply to the show-cause notice as pleaded in the provisional reply,” it stated and gave the PTI chief’s lawyers a time of seven days to file the supplementary reply.
“With consent of the parties we hereby appoint Pakistan Bar Council, Munir A Malik and Makhdoom Ali Khan as amicus curiae in the case to assist us,” the court added.
The IHC has summoned Imran and his lawyers on September 8 at 2:30pm.
Prior to the hearing, Islamabad police said a “special security plan” had been devised for the court ahead of the hearing.
“Only individuals with permission from the IHC will be allowed on the court’s premises and alternative routes have been arranged for residents of the area,” a tweet by the capital police said on Tuesday.
The hearing
Before the hearing commenced, PTI leader Babar Awan and his son were asked to leave the courtroom as their names were not presented in the list of approved attendees, the Dawn.com correspondent at the IHC said.
When the proceedings began, the IHC CJ referred to a reply submitted by Imran to the court a day ago, in which the former premier offered to take back his controversial remarks, and said he was not expecting the “reply that was read out”.
Addressing Imran’s lawyer, he added, “Hamid Khan, you are not just Imran Khan’s counsel but also an aide to the court.
“It was expected that you would have visited a subordinate court before coming here.” Justice Minallah remarked that he was saddened by Imran’s reply and the subordinate court referred to therein was “the court of the common man”.
“The common man still doesn’t have access to the Supreme Court or the high court,” he added.
Continuing, the IHC CJ commented: “Time that has passed and words that have been said cannot be taken back.” He said he was expecting that Imran would admit to making a mistake in his reply. “I was expecting that you would go to the courts and say that you trust them (the courts),” adding that Imran’s detailed response disappointed him.
Justice Minallah went on to say that questions were raised about a lower court. He asserted that the issue of torture had been raised by the IHC for the past three years.
