ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) directed the Interior Ministry on Thursday to submit rules for providing security to former prime ministers in a case about Chairman PTI Imran Khan’s request for security.
The former PM, who survived an assassination attempt on November 3, 2022, from which he is still recovering, has been requesting security, especially after a statement made by Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah that the PTI considered a death threat.
On March 7, before Sanaullah’s statement, Khan had moved the Lahore High Court for “foolproof security arrangements” and permission to attend the court proceedings through video link.
On the same day, a sessions court judge in Islamabad observed that it was the court’s responsibility to arrange security and had asked Khan’s counsel to inform the court of their reservations.
Today, Chief Justice of IHC Aamer Farooq presided over the hearing. At the same time, Barrister Salman Safdar appeared as Imran’s counsel instead of Advocate Faisal Chaudhry as he had commitments at the Supreme Court. Additional Attorney General (AAG) Munawar Iqbal Duggal and the Interior Ministry’s representative were also present during the hearing.
Today’s hearing at IHC
At the outset of the hearing, Justice Farooq said, “Tell the court what and how much security is needed to a former PM.”
Here, Barrister Safdar told the court that Imran Khan could not appear personally, to which Justice Farooq clarified that “In this case, an appearance is not due.”
He continued, “The petitioner is a former prime minister of the country. What is the rule about security?” AAG Duggal responded that the relevant rule was Section 17 (security) of the Prime Minister’s Salary, Allowances, and Privileges Act, 1975.
He said that “appropriate security” would be provided, and as per the law, the notification would be issued in the Special Gazette.
The IHC chief justice then questioned the AAG if any security had been provided to Khan, to which the official replied affirmatively that “one bulletproof car” had been given. The justice remarked, “[Even] I did not come in a bulletproof car right now.”
The AAG said that after the 18th Amendment, security was a provincial matter. Justice Farooq replied that it was “done after April 9 [last year]” and asked AAG Duggal to re-read the previous notification.
While addressing the AAG, the IHC chief justice said, “Bring these instructions from your office; you are asking the official standing behind you.” The AAG responded that an assessment committee decides what security to be provided.
He asked if a “well-educated” person from the Ministry of the Interior was present at the hearing, upon which the representative from the Interior Ministry appeared in the courtroom.
The official from the Interior Ministry told the court, “Lifetime security is given, but notification for this has to be issued, which has yet to be. Regarding Islamabad, the federal government looks over it while they review it in the provinces.
“The Deputy Inspector General (DIG) looks over the security matters. In the case of Punjab, the IG (inspector general) Punjab would look over it. While former PM Khan was in Islamabad, he was given foolproof security,” the official added.
Justice Farooq asked about the current situation, and the interior ministry representative replied that security was being provided to the PTI chairman.
The IHC chief justice asked, “If it’s an order of generalized security, then that has to be implemented. What is the order for the petitioner?” I have repeatedly been asking that when a former PM, whoever it is, comes to Islamabad, who is responsible for providing him security?”
To this, AAG Duggal replied that security was being provided in the provinces “as a response to a writ petition”.
Khan’s counsel said, “The Wazirabad incident is in front of everyone. The episode involving Salman Taseer had already happened.”
Chief Justice Farooq then ordered the AAG to give details of the “law or the custom, whatever it is, before the court”.
He remarked, “Prisoners in jail have rights as well. Everyone has rights. Today we are a judge; tomorrow, we will not. “Because of the rules, the West is ahead of us today.”
During the hearing, Justice Farooq asked AAG Duggal about the whereabouts of the orders for foolproof security provided to Imran Khan when he recently appeared in the hearings “twice or thrice”.
The AAG responded that the letter was presented in court. The judge further asked about the letter mentioning the petitioner’s name, as the letter the AAG said was a “general letter”.
Khan’s counsel told the court that a security plan was not there for the hearings and cited a past observation by IHC that the security should be provided according to the petitioner’s satisfaction.
Justice Farooq remarked, “It is perturbing that the state does not do such minor things. Why does one have to come to the court?”
Addressing the Additional Attorney General, the chief justice said, “Regarding the threat alert, you will have to assess security from time to time. One should get their legal rights. A former PM should get security according to their status. Establish good examples.”
Justice Farooq then directed AAG Duggal to present the security rules so that “an appropriate order” could be given.
