Veteran political analyst and renowned journalist Hamid Mir remarked on Saturday that the Toshakhana case against Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan was glaringly evident from the outset. However, Mir emphasized that the approach taken by the trial court and the presiding judge, Additional District Sessions Judge (ADSJ) Humayun Dilawar, during the proceedings would undoubtedly spark numerous “queries.”
In a significant turn of events earlier today, ADSJ Humayun handed down a conviction against the former prime minister for engaging in corrupt practices linked to the state gift repository — allegations which Khan vehemently refutes.
The 70-year-old former cricketer-turned-politician stood accused of exploiting his premiership to acquire and trade gifts held in state custody, gifts garnered during overseas visits and valued at more than 140 million Pakistani rupees ($490,000).
In a firm stance against Khan’s plea to deem the case inadmissible, Judge Dilawar sentenced the ex-prime minister to a three-year prison term.
“Charges of misdeclaration of assets have been substantiated against PTI chairman,” Judge Humayun asserted within his judgment.
Subsequently, he administered a three-year jail sentence to Khan alongside a fine of Rs100,000, concurrently issuing an immediate arrest warrant.
Expressing his perspective on Geo News, Mir remarked, “Today’s verdict was far from unforeseen, virtually every Pakistani anticipated this outcome.”
Mir went on to mention that Khan and his legal team had pursued every conceivable avenue to transfer the case to an alternate court.
However, he underscored that it appears as though the judge had drafted his verdict in advance and merely awaited the morning to proclaim it.
Check out our monthly English and Urdu magazines on Homepage
“Evidently, the allegations against Khan hold substance, but the procedural manner in which the court managed the case, coupled with the judge’s comportment, leaves room for considerable questioning.”
“The verdict is poised for challenge in superior courts, and there remains a possibility of relief for Khan,” he stated, emphasizing the significance of noting that yet another prime minister of the nation faced punitive measures.
“It’s intriguing how only prime ministers find themselves penalized, while those who trample upon the Constitution manage to escape unscathed,” he mused.
Subscribe our website for latest updates:
https://republicpolicy.com/shop/
Read More
