ISLAMABAD: In spite of a protracted crackdown on his political party, former prime minister Imran Khan on Tuesday appeared buoyant about its electoral prospects, saying the PTI will spring a ‘surprise’ on Feb 8 through its ‘Plan C’, which is ready after the failure of its so-called ‘Plan A’ and ‘Plan B’.
The PTI founder made these remarks during a conversation with reporters at Adiala Jail, who had gathered to cover the proceedings of cases, including the cipher case, underway against him in prison.
Mr Khan did not elaborate on what he meant by Plan C, but a day earlier, former PTI chairman Gohar Ali Khan had said that the said plan revolved around retaining the reserved seats of the party following the loss of their electoral symbol, ‘bat’. ‘Plan B’ was ostensibly a deal the PTI had signed with its splinter group, ‘PTI-Nazriati’, to contest polls under the ‘batsman’ symbol, which was thwarted by the Election Commission of Pakistan.
On Tuesday, the PTI founder said that the party leadership knew that conspirators would spoil their plans, therefore, they had worked out alternative strategies.
He claimed that a conspiracy was hatched against the PTI government, adding that about 10,000 workers of the party were put behind bars and efforts to dismantle the political party were also in full swing. He said that as the founder of the PTI, whose political struggle spanned over 27 years, he was facing multiple charges along with his spouse Bushra Bibi.
Cipher issue
He also talked about the cipher issue, saying former army chief Qamar Javed Bajwa offered him a two-thirds majority to keep quiet on the cipher issue and warned him of consequences if he tried to highlight the issue in public.
He said that Gen Bajwa had made the offer during meetings held at the President’s House, provided he (Imran) would “behave sensibly and would not underscore the cipher issue”.
PTI’s founding chairman said that his party was being targeted over violence on May 9. He further alleged that the violent protests targeting the Corps Commander House and the GHQ were a part of the ‘London agreement’ and claimed that the PTI was not behind this mess.
Mr Khan denied a news report that he hurled threats to the members of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and warned them of proceedings for high treason.
Nomination papers
Separately, a Lahore High Court full bench on Tuesday reserved its verdict on two petitions of Imran Khan, challenging the decisions of the rejection of his nomination papers from NA-122, Lahore and NA-89, Mianwali.
Mr Khan’s nomination papers were rejected primarily on the grounds of being convicted in the Toshakhana case. His nomination papers from NA-122 were also dismissed on the grounds of the proposer not being a voter from the constituency.
Advocate Uzair Bhandari argued on behalf of Mr Khan that the conviction on the charge of moral turpitude did not fall under the definition of disqualification. He said the conviction of the petitioner could not be equated with the conviction for corruption or accumulating illegal assets.
He pointed out that an Indian court enlisted the offence of moral turpitude lower than the offence involving financial corruption. However, the bench observed that the standards of morality in Pakistan were different from other regions.
He argued that the returning officer (RO) had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order on the basis of the conviction on moral turpitude. He stated that the Islamabad High Court had already suspended the sentence of the petitioner. A lawyer for the ECP argued that the conviction of the petitioner was still in force and he had not been acquitted by the high court.
Toshakhana case
Meanwhile, senior counsel Sardar Latif Khosa on Tuesday requested for an early hearing of an appeal seeking to set aside Aug 5, 2023, his three-year conviction awarded by the trial court to PTI founder Imran Khan in the Toshakhana case.
Senior counsel Sardar Shahbaz Khosa had made a verbal request before a three-member bench led by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, which was hearing a different case.
At this, the CJP regretted that on the one hand, the counsel was seeking relief from the court but on the other, he did not pose confidence in the courts and hurled allegations outside the court.
The CJP suggested to the counsel to move an application for the early hearing of the case and the court would grant any relief if the law necessitated it.
