- The political committee of the party takes the decision in a meeting chaired by Barrister Gauhar.
Islamabad: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf has decided to challenge the decision of the accountability court in the Al-Qadir Trust case on (yesterday) Monday.
This was said in a meeting of PTI’s political committee chaired by Barrister Gohar Khan, in which Umar Ayub, Shibli Faraz, Ali Amin Gandapur, Asad Qaiser, Salman Akram Raja and others participated.
According to PTI insiders, matters related to the decision of the Al-Qadir Trust case and the ongoing negotiations with the government were discussed in detail.
On this occasion, PTI’s legal team apprised the leadership about the Al-Qadir Trust case and its various aspects. After a deliberative meeting, PTI’s political committee decided to challenge the decision in the Al-Qadir Trust case on (yesterday) Monday.
On Friday, the Accountability Court (AC) sentenced PTI founder Imran Khan to 14 years in prison and his wife Bushra Bibi to seven years in the £190 million corruption reference (Al-Qadir Trust Case).
AC Judge Nasir Javed Rana delivered the reserved verdict – three times late – in a makeshift courtroom at Adiala Jail. The court also imposed a fine of Rs 10 lakh and Rs 500,000 on Imran and Bushra respectively. The court said that as a result of failure to pay the fine, Imran will be jailed for another six months and Bushra for three months.
According to the judgment, “the property of Shama Trust ‘Al-Qadir University Project Trust’ has been forfeited to the Federal Government under Section 10(a) of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999.”
“Both the convicts are before the court, they should be taken into custody in this case and handed over to the Superintendent Jail with committal warrant to serve their sentences,” he added.
PTI founder’s determination to fight till the last ball
After the court verdict, former Prime Minister Imran Khan condemned the verdict in the Al-Qadri Trust case, calling it a “mockery” of justice and vowed to fight to the last ball and refuse any deal.
In a statement shared on social media platforms Facebook and X, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan condemned the court verdict in the Al-Qadir Trust case, which had already been leaked to the media along with the verdict and sentence. He called it a thoughtful move. official announcement.
According to the Express Tribune report, Khan termed the judicial process as a “mockery” of justice and said that the people who wrote the verdict had leaked it to the media, undermining the integrity of the legal system. The PTI founder reiterated his stand against the “military-backed regime” and vowed never to accept it.
Reacting to the announcement of the verdict on Friday, PTI leaders like Umar Ayub, Sheikh Waqas Akram and others protested the innocence of the couple and said that their party founder had been targeted for political vendetta.
After the decision, the leader of the opposition in the National Assembly held a press conference and said that we will challenge this decision in the higher courts.
Barrister Gohar Ali Khan, the party’s interim chairman, said an appeal would be filed in the High Court in a few days, and expressed hope that Mr Khan would be released soon.
He also said that the party’s founder, whose morale was high despite his conviction, had directed him to continue talks with the government.
PTI’s lawyer Faisal Chaudhry termed the decision as an example of NAB’s political use.
“There is no evidence of financial gain, criminal activity or financial corruption. This is a nonsense verdict in a nonsense case,” he claimed.
Meanwhile, party spokesperson Sheikh Waqas Akram smelled a rat on Judge Nasir Javed Rana’s way of repeatedly postponing the verdict and also questioned his competence.
Addressing a press conference at the KP Information Department on Friday, Mr. Akram said that there was definitely some kind of interference or agenda behind the postponement of the decision in the Al-Qadir Trust case over the past weeks.
He said that the three judges who had heard the case earlier had been changed and the fourth judge who had heard the matter had delivered the verdict.
