ISLAMABAD: On Thursday, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) lifted the stay order on the in-camera cipher trial of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, following assurances from the state counsel that witnesses’ statements would be recorded anew.
The cipher case revolves around a diplomatic document, as per the Federal Investigation Agency’s charge sheet, allegedly not returned by Imran. The PTI contends that the document contained a US threat to remove Imran as prime minister.
Last month, Justice Miangul Hasan Aurangzeb had restrained the special court, including former foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, from proceeding until January 11, citing “legal errors” in the case. This decision stemmed from Imran’s petition challenging the trial at Adiala Jail, charges framing, and a media gag order.
The Special Court (Official Secrets Act) restarted the cipher trial last month at Adiala Jail after Imran and Qureshi were indicted for the second time on December 13. Initially indicted in October, both pleaded not guilty, with the IHC deeming the jail trial notification “erroneous” and scrapping the proceedings.
The Supreme Court had approved post-arrest bails for Imran and Qureshi last month. Imran remains detained in other cases, while Qureshi’s expected release was hindered due to a fresh May 9 case.
In the recent hearing, Justice Aurangzeb presided, with Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan assuring the court. Imran’s counsel Salman Akram Raja and others also attended. The FIA sought Justice (rtd) Hamid Ali Shah’s assistance.
AGP Awan informed the court that the statements of thirteen witnesses would be re-recorded, while the FIA stated that 12 others were pending. The judge noted the differences between civil and criminal law, emphasizing the need to record witnesses’ statements again if necessary.
At the hearing’s start, AGP Awan assured the court that all official documents related to the case would be submitted. He mentioned the trial court’s in-camera proceedings and the availability of certified copies of witness statements with the petitioners’ lawyers. Referring to the December 14 decision restricting media coverage, he expressed readiness to re-record witness statements if deemed necessary.
