ISLAMABAD    -   Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan has moved the Islamabad High Court (IHC) seeking judicial intervention in the affairs of the Rawalpindi Central Jail as he asserted that the prison is being managed by officials of an intelligence agency.

The former prime minister moved the petition through his counsel Shoaib Shaheen Advocate and adopted the stance that the two intelligence officials virtually control the prison. He said that despite IHC’s clear orders, the superintendent of Adiala Jail did not allow him to consult with the PTI leadership as well as lawyers. He mentioned the case recently decided by the IHC in which the high court, while referring to Rule 265 of the Jail Manual, observed that the inmate is entitled to writing letters and interviews twice a week.

Imran said in the petition, “It is clarified that this order is passed to remind, reiterate and preserve the values and traditions of our legal system and has little to do with the identity of the petitioner alone. These values and traditions must apply across the board, irrespective of who the petitioner is, but, it goes without saying, they acquire greater prominence when the prisoner in question happens to be not only a political leader with substantial following but also the erstwhile holder of the highest executive office of the nation.”

The petitioner maintained that the IHC has time and again directed the Superintendent of Adiala Jail to revise the standard operating procedure that two days in a week are insufficient for the purpose of a meeting. He also said that the Supreme Court of Pakistan, while hearing an appeal about amendments to National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) laws, has admitted that PTI and the petitioner have greater support among the masses and the apex court has suggested political dialogues to allow the party to perform its significant role in reducing the miseries of the masses at large.

However, the petitioner stated that “this whole process has been dealt with by the colonel and major of ISI who create interference and indulgence in the civil administration due to having a mala fide intention against the petitioner and due to their interference, the petitioner is unable to consult with party leadership and his fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution are not protected”.