The trial of former prime minister Imran Khan in the Cypher case was postponed till January 11 by the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday, with the reason given being “legal errors”.
The brief ruling was made by Justice Miangul Hasan Aurangzeb in response to a plea filed by Imran contesting the trial.
Today’s sessions saw appearances by FIA’s prosecution team, Attorney General of Pakistan Mansoor Awan, Additional AGP Iqbal Duggal, and PTI counsel Salman Akram Raja via video link.
Judge Aurangzeb questioned why an open trial had been ordered by the court and yet in-camera sessions were taking place. Additionally, he stated that the court had no jurisdiction over security-related matters.
He further noted that while family members and the media were permitted to attend the hearing, a new petition has been filed claiming that the proceedings are now taking place behind closed doors.
AGP Awan stated that the trial was not being kept in camera for the whole duration, just the witness statements. He clarified that out of the 25 witnesses, the testimony of 13 had been recorded and two had been subjected to cross-examination.
Awan stated, “The defence has not cross-examined 10 witnesses,” and that the media was not permitted to speak with the witnesses after the testimony of 13 witnesses was recorded.
The court then asked how the media was barred from the hearing because the trial court order had not been contested and whether family members may still attend the hearing.
In response, Awan said that witnesses were asked to leave while testimony were being recorded and were given permission to return after the procedure was over.
Judge Aurangzeb requested people to leave and then returned to the courtroom, saying, “This does not look like an open trial.”
According to the AGP, three foreign ministry officials who had deciphered and obtained the cypher were on the witness list. He continued by saying that the government would ask the court to record the custodian of the secret document’s comments.
In response, Justice Aurangzeb stated that he had made several attempts to clarify the concept of an open trial to both the prosecution and the trial court judge. He also mentioned that the legislation now in effect was from a time when the nation was even a concept.
When the top court granted bail to Imran and Qureshi in the case, the judge then inquired as to how many witnesses had recorded their testimony. In response, the AGP stated that 13 testimonials were logged. Justice Aurangzeb then pointed out that the SC had pointed out that there wasn’t enough evidence in the case.
Additionally, he noted that the decision made by the special court judge was “inaccurate.” Justice Aurangzeb insisted there were legal mistakes in the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2023 when the FIA prosecutor read it aloud.
PTI attorney Raja said that since all of the witness testimony was recorded in the court’s certified copy of the order, it was already accessible online. The certified copy, he said, is a publicly accessible record.
Reiterating his previous observation, Justice Aurangzeb postponed the hearing to January 11 and then issued an interim injunction that prevented the special court from moving forward until the petition’s subsequent hearing.
A separate PTI appeal asking for a restraining order on the cypher trial was heard by the IHC earlier today. Nonetheless, notices had been sent by the court to the federation and the respondents.
Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb heard the plea, which contested the trial court’s order from December 12.
Salman Usman Gul, Imran’s attorney, asked that the trial be stopped right away, but Justice Aurangzeb refused, saying that notices will be sent to the respondents first and the case would be looked into later.
The court then asked the defense attorney whether a government official with the proper authority could come before the court and make a complaint. The PTI attorney emphasized that the case had been filed with a first information report rather than a complaint.
He continued by saying that 25 witnesses have recorded their testimonies in the case, three of whom have been subjected to cross-examination. The case is heard every day.
In addition, the attorney asked that the IHC direct the special court to hold the trial in five or six days so that it could “complete the trial during this period”.
After adjourning the session, Justice Aurangzeb stated that notices would be sent out beforehand.
I am a dedicated student currently in my seventh semester, pursuing a degree in International Relations. Alongside my academic pursuits, I am actively engaged in the professional field as a content writer at the Rangeinn website.