ISLAMABAD: The Ministry of Interior has submitted the record of PTI leaders’ tweets, video clips of messages and phone calls in Supreme Court in the hearing of the contempt case against Chairman PTI Imran Khan. A five-member larger bench of the Supreme Court headed by CJP Justice Umar Ata Bandial conducted hearing of the contempt of court case against Imran Khan.
The interior ministry said, “Imran Khan made wrong statement in his written reply to the court.” It added that the PTI and Imran Khan had already planned to reach D-Chowk. The ministry said, “In a message issued by Imran Khan on May 24, he had invited to participate in the ‘Haqeeqi Azadi March’ at D-Chowk on May 25.” “Faisal Javed, Shireen Mazari and Munazza Hassan had also tweeted to reach the D-Chowk,” interior ministry said.
It added, “PTI is saying Asad Umar had instructed to reach H-9 Ground, which is against the facts.” It further said, “In his two speeches on May 25 afternoon, Imran Khan had vowed to reach the D-Chowk,” ministry further said. “Both these speeches were relayed live on the official account of the PTI,” ministry said. “PTI’s claim of installing mobile phone jammers is also against the factual position, there is evidence that the social media was used from the container during the PTI’s march,” according to the ministry’s statement.
Earlier, Imran Khan in his reply to the court through advocate Salman Akram Raja advocate stated that the SC order of May 25 was “not knowingly violated”. In his reply, the former prime minister assures the court that he was not informed about the court order on the evening of May 25th. Khan pleaded to the court to end the contempt proceedings against him as he had not deliberately violated any order of the Supreme Court. It may be noted that the government moved the SC against Khan for violating the court’s direction regarding his earlier sit-in in Islamabad.
Imran moves petition in SC: Chairman PTI Imran Khan has filed a petition in the Supreme Court to submit further material in the federal government petition against him regarding the May 25 incident.
In his petition, he submitted that the primary issue relevant for the question of commission or otherwise of contempt of the verbal order of the Court is whether he had been duly informed of the contents, scope and effect of the said order at the relevant time.
Khan sated that neither Babar Awan nor Faisal Fareed Chaudhry had been appointed/ instructed to appeal on his behalf by Imran Khan. They were the two individuals who could have adequately and reliably informed IK of the verbal order passed by the Court at 06:05 p.m. The respondent has not claimed that jamming made communication impossible. The respondent seeks to place before the Court a document issued by the Chief Minister’s Secretariat, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa dated May 25. The said document is with respect to the presence of a mobile jamming device as part of the motorcade of the chief minister KP, who accompanied the respondent during the afternoon and evening of 25th May.
The PTI Chairman said that the Court in its 25th May order had required the Secretary Interior, IGP Islamabad, IGP Punjab and deputy commissioner Attock to facilitate a meeting of the designated PTI leadership in Islamabad, that included Babar Awan, with the respondent and the safe return to Islamabad with the leadership so as to be able to meet with the government appointed committee by 10:00 p.m. This direction of the Court was flagrantly disregarded by the concerned officials.
He added that the cavalcade of the respondent was subjected to unprovoked violence and shelling upon entry into the province of the Punjab. Consequently, the respondent and his colleagues were in a situation of extreme stress. It was in these stressful circumstances that the respondent could gain information of the verbal order of the Court of 06:05 p.m. through political activists who, in turn, could gain access to social media platforms by avoiding the effect of jamming.