The Islamabad High Court (IHC) revoked the stay order on Thursday in the cipher case trial, declaring all proceedings after December 14 null and void.
Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb heard the appeal against the in-camera trial of PTI founder and former prime minister Imran Khan in the cipher case. The IHC had stopped the trial of the case till January 11.
During the hearing, Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan and Imran’s lawyer Salman Akram Raja appeared in court. Following the AGP’s arguments, Raja maintained that the proceedings after the December 14 order should be declared null and void as the order was incorrect.
The special court hearing the cipher case had on December 14 accepted the Federal Investigation Agency’s (FIA) plea seeking an in-camera trial of the former premier and former foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, his co-accused. The plea was accepted despite the IHC’s earlier order calling for the trial to be heard in open court. Justice Aurangzeb then told the AGP that if he wanted the proceedings to start again, then he should do it from the date the order was passed. A relevant order will also be issued in this regard. AGP Awan assured to start the proceedings again, adding that 13 witnesses were ready to have their statements recorded again. Later, the court annulled all proceedings of the cipher case trial after December 14 and cancelled the stay order.
In the previous hearing, the court noted that the in-camera statements of the remaining nine witnesses were not in accordance with law and must be examined. According to the AGP, the statements of 12 witnesses were recorded in an open trial after December 21. The order read that an open trial could not be conducted in-camera on the mere request of the prosecution. The order stated that the re-recording of the testimonies of the nine witnesses in the in-camera trial would be considered in the final judgment.
The IHC noted that in the cipher trial, the special court released the certified copies of witnesses’ statements. It added that the IHC would examine from the certified copies whether any damage could be caused to the state or not. Earlier during the hearing, Justice Aurangzeb remarked that the SC had declared the material insufficient in its judgment in this case. He added that before the court was a case of first impression and the safety of the state should not be compromised.
