IHC dismisses petition seeking treason proceedings against Imran Khan, other PTI leaders – Pakistan

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday rejected a petition seeking a “great treason lawsuit” that placed PTI Chairman Imran Khan and his name on the Exit Control List (ECL).

The petition filed by Counsel Molvi Iqbal Haider under Article 199 of the Constitution also called for initiation of action under the Great Treason (Penalty) Act of 1973 against Khan, PTI Vice President Shah Mahmood Qureshi, PTI Spokesperson Fawad Chaudhry, and PTI Leader Qasim Khan Suri. . US as ambassador to Pakistan. They also requested that their names be included in the ECL.

The petition also requested an investigation into the contents of the telegram sent by the then US ambassador, Assad Majid, to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. According to the recently ousted Prime Minister, Khan, the first telegram he spoke and wielded at a public rally on March 27 details the meeting between the ambassador and assistant secretary for Latin America Donald Lu. threatened Pakistan. Khan and his party were ousted from the top positions by linking the suspected threat to a measure of no confidence in the National Assembly against him.

Majeed said on cable that he had warned that Lu would affect relations between the two countries if he continued Khan’s prime minister. Khan claims the US was annoyed by his “independent foreign policy” and his visit to Moscow.

The IHC dismissed the petition as “insignificant” and added that the petition attempted to make the cable “controversial”. The claimant was also fined Rs.

court order Serb.com“The rhetoric of treason is obsolete. No citizen can claim to be more patriotic than another. Likewise, no citizen has the right to declare that he has committed treason against another.”

In the petition, the allegations against Khan were “deprecated” and it was said that making documents sent by Pakistani diplomats “disputed and subject to litigation” was against the public and national interests.

“It is the burdensome duty of every citizen to ensure that sensitive national security issues are not selected or politicized.

“Bringing diplomats and their classified reports and evaluations into a political debate could undermine Pakistan’s national interests and diplomatic and foreign relations,” the court order said.

The order stated that the “law settled” was that issues related to the country’s diplomacy were “extremely sensitive and therefore unjustifiable”. He said the allegations were “ambiguous” and not supported by credible sources that would make the diplomatic telegram the subject of litigation.

“(Telegram) has been brought before the National Security Council. The latter seems to be content that no investigation is required. Such sensitive and complex issues should rather be dealt with by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan. [than] It is causing controversy through litigation.”

It admonished the petitioner by saying it did not recognize the importance of the sensitive nature of diplomatic telegrams sent by Pakistani diplomats.

“Diplomatic documents are highly sensitive and have limited access. They are classified because they allow Pakistani diplomats to make assessments and analyzes on uninhabited islands, including disclosure of rare information. It is not sensationalized or politicized.”

court hearing

IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah presided over a hearing on the petition earlier today.

Plaintiff’s attorney, Heider, told the court that the opposition had submitted a letter of no confidence to former Prime Minister Imran Khan on March 8, but the telegram and its contents were not mentioned until March 27.

Haider was asked why he wanted to politicize the issue of “sensitive personality,” and Judge Minallah pointed out that it was a telegram, not a letter, and there was a difference between the two.

The petitioner replied that it had been mentioned in a letter in the press and newspapers, and that he was concerned as a citizen. “There was an attempt to damage relations with the United States,” he said.

When Haider told the court that former military ruler General Pervez Musharraf had violated the constitution, Judge Minallah asked him not to compare Khan to Musharraf because Musharraf was the elected prime minister.

The petitioner added that it was the federal government’s responsibility to investigate the telegram suspected of threatening the overthrow of the Khan government by the Interior Minister.

“The federation should take this matter to the International Court of Justice,” he said, insisting that the ambassadors Khan, Chodri, Kureshi, Suri and Majid should also be placed on the no-fly list.

The claimant said, “We should order to forward the complaint against the accused to the lower court,” he said.