ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday sought replies from the superintendent of Adiala Jail, Punjab home secretary, and secretary of defence regarding a petition filed by former prime minister Imran Khan, who alleged interference by the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) in the jail administration.
IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq heard the petition and, following a preliminary hearing, issued notices to the three government officials. The hearing was adjourned until next week.
In his petition, filed through his counsel Shoaib Shaheen, Mr. Khan claimed that a major and a colonel from the ISI were effectively controlling Adiala Jail.
The petition stated that despite clear orders from the IHC, the superintendent of Adiala Jail did not allow him to consult with the PTI leadership or his lawyers.
The former PM’s petition claimed that a major and colonel were ‘virtually controlling’ Adiala Jail.
He referenced a recent IHC decision which, citing Rule 265 of the jail manual, observed that inmates are entitled to write letters and have interviews twice a week.
“This order is issued to reaffirm and uphold the values and traditions of our legal system, and it pertains to more than just the identity of the petitioner,” the petition stated.
“These values and traditions must be applied universally, regardless of the petitioner’s identity, but they gain additional importance when the prisoner is not only a political leader with substantial support but also a former holder of the highest executive office in the nation,” it added.
The petition noted that the IHC has repeatedly directed the superintendent of Adiala Jail to “revise the standard operating procedures, as two days a week are insufficient for meeting purposes.”
It also pointed out that the Supreme Court, while hearing the appeal against amendments to National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) laws, proposed holding dialogues and acknowledged that the PTI and the petitioner, given their significant public support, need to play a crucial role in alleviating public miseries.
However, the petition alleged, “this entire process has been undermined by a colonel and a major from the ISI, who interfere in the civil administration with malicious intent against the petitioner, preventing him from consulting with party leadership and safeguarding his fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.”
