Islamabad High Court (IHC) while summoning the rules for providing security to Imran Khan has issued directives what and how much security is meant for former Prime Minister (PM).
The court further remarked ” present the rules and then we will issue orders. Provide the security according to what is written in rules. Leave Lahore. Tell us about Islamabad.
The case regarding security of Imran Khan with reference to interior minister threatening statement came up for hearing before Chief Justice (CJ) IHC Amir Farooq Thursday.
The court summoned the rules regarding provision of security to Imran Khan.
The court issued directives that it should be informed what and how much security is being provided to former PM. Present the rules. Then orders will be issued.
Suleman Safdar counsel for Imran Khan appeared in the court.
He told the court Imran Khan cannot appear in this case.
The court remarked there is no attendance matter in this case. Here only security has to be provided.
Suleman Safdar said ” Oh sorry this is not my case. In this case Faisal Chaudhry is counsel. Faisal Chaudhry is in SC.
The court once again inquired from Additional Attorney General (AAG) the petitioner is former PM. What is law of security.
AAG told the court there is section 17 of 1975 act is regarding provision of security to PM. It says appropriate security will be provided. Notification in respect of security of former PM will be issued. This is law through special gazette.
The court inquired has the security been provided.
AAG told the court yes Imran Khan has been provided a bullet proof vehicle.
.
AAG told the court the security issue is provincial matter after 18th amendment.
The court remarked ” with regret. Perhaps my English is weak. What it will be after April 9 . Read it again what notification was issued. You should bring these instructions from your office. You are asking from the officer who is standing behind you.
AAG told the court assessment committee decides how much security is.
Is there any educated man in interior ministry.
The representative of the interior ministry appeared in the court.
He told the court life time security is provided. Its notification was to be issued but it has not been issued so far. Federal government sees the matter of security to the extent of Islamabad. In other provinces there is their own security. IG sees security. IG Punjab will see the matter to the extent of Punjab. As long as Imran Khan remained in Islamabad , fool proof security was provided to him.
The court remarked leave fool or April fool. What happened then. What is situation now.
The representative of interior ministry told the court security has been provided to Imran Khan.
The court remarked there is order of generalize security which has to be made. What is order for petitioner. He is asking for it repeatedly that who will provide him security when a former PM comes to Islamabad.
AAG told the court security is being provided in provinces.
Barrister Suleman Safdar told the court Waziabad incident has happened which is before all. Suleman Taseer incident has already taken place.
The court remarked what is law it is law. Provide the security which is mentioned in law. Leave Lahore. Tell us about Islamabad., This is not so big issue. You know it. What is law and rules should be filed in court. If a prisoner is in jail he has too his rights. The rights of every person are there. Today we are judge and tomorrow we will not remain judge. It is not as if some one is in opposition tomorrow then the rules are changed for him and when he comes to power then there will be different rules. When Imran Khan case was heard for two or three time previously then where are the then orders of the fool proof security.
AAG told the court letter was presented in the court.
The court remarked this is a general letter and mention has been made about former PM therein. Where is letter which is in specific name of petitioner.
The counsel for Imran Khan said there was no plan of security. Wazirabad incident has happened. This court had given observation with reference to Suleman Taseer incident that security should be provided to the satisfaction of the petitioner.
The Chief Justice remarked it is matter of regret that why the government does not do these small things on its own. Why people have to come to court. You will have to conduct security assessment with reference to threat alert with the passage of time. what is legal right of any one it should be given to one The security should be given to former PM according to his status.
The CJ directed AAG that good precedents be set.
The court while summoning rules of security with reference to former PM remarked proper order will be issued after rules are presented.
The court adjourned the hearing of the case.
