In Islamabad, Dr. Uzma Khan, sister of the jailed former Prime Minister Imran Khan, has once again approached the Supreme Court, submitting a renewed request for an expedited hearing of her contempt petition. This plea targets government officials who allegedly ignored a court order to transfer Imran Khan to Shifa International Hospital in Islamabad.
On August 18, a directive from a three-judge panel of the Supreme Court mandated that Imran Khan, leader of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), be moved to the private Shifa International Hospital due to health concerns. However, contrary to this directive, authorities took him to the government-run Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) for a medical examination before returning him to jail.
The contempt petition was originally scheduled for a hearing on September 16 by a bench comprising Justices Shahid Waheed, Naeem Akhtar Afghan, and Ishtiaq Ibrahim, who had initially ordered the hospital transfer. In her latest application, filed through Advocate Uzair Karamat Bhandari, Dr. Uzma Khan insists on immediate contempt proceedings, arguing that the August 18 order should be promptly enforced to protect her brother’s health and rights.
The application emphasizes the urgency due to the deteriorating health of Imran Khan, describing him as a national hero whose life is at risk. It questions whether the September 16 date was set by the chief justice or merely noted by the registrar awaiting higher approval.
Dr. Uzma Khan’s plea argues that the unique aspects of this case, including the blatant disregard of the court’s August 18 order, have attracted international attention to Pakistan’s governance and judicial systems. She warns that any further postponement could result in significant harm.
Previously, the Supreme Court office stated that an early hearing was unfeasible due to the backlog of 94 similar criminal petitions, adhering to a policy of addressing cases in their scheduled order. However, Uzma’s new application challenges this reasoning, claiming the policy allows for prioritizing cases involving personal liberty, especially when court orders are defied.
The application highlights that the chief justice has the authority to expedite hearings, asserting that the case for an early hearing is strong and would not prejudice the respondents. Instead, postponement could lead to irreversible damage.
