— IHC accepts former PM’s apology over warning of legal action to junior judge
— Tells unconvinced government lawyer to submit apprehensions in writing
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) accepted an apology tendered by Imran Khan for warning a junior judge of legal action and closed the suo motu contempt of court notice it opened against the former prime minister in August.
The high court had been expected to indict Khan, a move that could have led to his exclusion from politics for life if convicted. But, in the last week of September, he apologised and promised not to hurt the dignity of the judiciary, in a move aimed at avoiding his disqualification.
A convicted politician is liable to be disqualified, for five years at least, under the laws.
Pakistan has seen disqualification on contempt charges before. In 2012, the Supreme Court disqualified Yousaf Raza Gillani, then-prime minister, from office after finding him guilty of contempt for refusing to comply with its order to reopen dormant fraud investigations against Asif Ali Zardari, president at the time.
The charges against Khan are related to a speech in which he allegedly threatened the chief of Islamabad police and the judge in August after Shehbaz Gill, his former chief of staff, was denied bail in a trumped-up sedition case.
“He stated that he realised during the proceedings that he may have crossed a red line,” the court said. Khan had previously denied being threatening.
In his remarks announcing the case being discharged, Chief Justice Athar Minallah said the court was “satisfied” with the “bona fide apology” and conduct of Khan.
To concerns from Additional Attorney General Amir Rehman that Khan had not submitted an “unconditional apology” the judge directed for a written submission, noting it would be incorporated in the final order, to be issued at a later point.
The verbal apology on September 22 had come after two separate written replies that were rejected as “unsatisfactory” by the court.
The court, which had been set to indict him at the hearing, had then directed him to submit a written affidavit and postponed the indictment proceedings until October 3.
In his latest response, Khan had once again avoided an “unconditional apology,” but admitted he “might have crossed a red line while making a public speech.” Assuring the court that he was willing to explain to the junior judge that neither he, nor his party, had sought any action other than “legal” against her, Khan had vowed to not repeat a similar offense in the future.
He had also assured the court that he was willing to take any further steps that the court deemed necessary to avoid criminal proceedings.
