Constitutional Immunity
In a detailed judgment issued on Saturday, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) dismissed Shah Mahmood Qureshi’s case, ruling that aiding a crime under the Official Secrets Act carries the maximum penalty and does not enjoy constitutional protection for remarks made in public gatherings (jalsas).
Chief Justice Aamer Farooq, in the 10-page order, clarified that Qureshi’s plea for immunity under Article 248 of the constitution, safeguarding actions during official duty, is not applicable to the cipher revelation during a public gathering.
The judgment erroneously states the PTI rally date as 2023 instead of 2022. It underscores that Imran Khan, the main accused, faces serious charges, and Qureshi, charged with abetting the crime, may face a similar sentence.
Justice Farooq emphasized that the denial of bail should not be punitive, proposing a speedy trial completion within four weeks. The judgment highlights the necessity to exercise caution in cases involving potential death sentences.
The ruling clarifies that while Article 248 protects actions during official duty, it does not extend to public disclosures made in gatherings like jalsas. It provides legal insight into the delicate balance required between preserving individual liberty and addressing the gravity of the charges.
In conclusion, the IHC’s recent ruling definitively clarifies that constitutional immunity does not extend to remarks aiding criminal acts made in public gatherings, offering vital legal clarity. This decision establishes a precedent, emphasizing the legal consequences for actions during such gatherings, providing a clear framework for cases involving the intersection of constitutional privileges and criminal allegations.
