Hamid Khan represented Imran Khan when former Pakistani Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry brought a contempt lawsuit against him for slandering the judiciary’s participation in the 2013 general elections.
Hamid, however, was unable to persuade the bench to dismiss the contempt charges.
Imran Khan PTI Chairman:
Finally, on August 28, 2013, the PTI chairman appeared at the podium and made an identical declaration to the one he had made on Thursday before the IHC’s bigger bench.
Imran had informed the court nine years earlier that he was dedicated to the dominance of the court as an impartial and highly regarded institution.
Therefore, he said, there would never again be a situation where the court would discover him making any scandalous or disparaging remarks against this establishment.
He claimed to have a clear understanding of how crucial it is for the judiciary to be permitted to operate autonomously in every democratic nation, without incident, and without raising any issues, in order for the general public to have complete faith in this institution.
He also continued by saying that he had complete trust and belief in this establishment, especially in the current judiciary, which had proven its bravery and independence in several significant cases resolved recently.
The SC had taken note of the PTI chief’s behaviour in court and said that throughout the hearings, it was clear from his body language that he held the proceedings in the utmost respect and consideration.
The Supreme Court issued a nine-year-old judgement that stated, Even while speaking the court, Imran had showed signs of confronting an unpleasant circumstance and remorse on his face with regard to these procedures, which had expanded beyond his one word disagreeable remark.
Imran was noticeably perplexed when the IHC awarded him permission to present his case on Thursday, but he stuck to the truth as recommended by his legal counsel.
It was seen that Salman Safdar, Imran’s attorney, routinely practised presenting this remark in court before the hearing ever began.
According to information obtained, Safdar accompanied Imran as he drove from his home to the IHC.
There was no need to refute or provide an explanation because Safdar had persuaded the former premier to make the statement.
Athar Minallah, chief justice of the IHC, also three times praised Imran’s statement. The PTI head stated that he would have apologised three times to the female magistrate during the brief session.
Just after hearing, Imran’s lawyer, Hamid, was overjoyed and especially complimented the Karachi-based amici curiae Makhdoom Ali Khan and Muneer A Malik for travelling to join.
The IHC hearings were important for Hamid as well since he was having a difficult time dealing with a division inside the party.
The same segment of the PTI regularly advised Imran to switch out Hamid for a new attorney.
Fawad Chaudhry, the PTI leader, even criticised Hamid’s on-camera appearance.
A news was informed by sources that Imran was also prepared to make an unreserved apology.
The defence counsel informed him that a sincere apology would be the same as admitting guilt. He was therefore ordered to make a limited apology.
It’s interesting that while several team members opposed one member’s suggestion, he was in favour of initiating legal challenges to the IHC hearings.
Entry passes were required for lawyers, law enforcement officials, and media to enter the courtroom, and the high court’s registrar also made it possible to listen to audio cases in the press room and bar room.
Imran was given permission to enter the courtroom with a 15-person legal team that included 15 members of the attorney general and advocate general offices, three court assistants, and 15 court reporters.
Five attorneys from the local bar and the high court will be permitted in the courthouse, according to the memorandum.
