ISLAMABAD (MNN); The Islamabad Chief Commissioner has filed a review petition against the Supreme Court’s order directing that incarcerated PTI founder Imran Khan be shifted from Adiala Jail to Shifa International Hospital, arguing that the decision contains legal and procedural errors and raises serious security and prison administration concerns.
The development comes after Imran Khan was taken to the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) during the night between August 20 and 21, instead of Shifa International Hospital, for medical examination and treatment.
According to available information, two specialists from Shifa International Hospital also participated in the examination of Imran Khan’s eye condition, while other medical assessments were carried out by relevant specialists at PIMS. The medical opinion relating to his eye examination was considered alongside the results of other tests and investigations conducted at PIMS.
Subsequently, a medical board comprising PIMS doctors prepared Imran Khan’s medical fitness report. The PIMS administration said confidential medical details would not be made public in view of patient privacy and the directions of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court had, in its August 18 order, directed the transfer of the former prime minister to the private Shifa International Hospital. However, citing security concerns, authorities shifted him to the government-run PIMS under tight security shortly before the expiry of the 48-hour deadline set by the court.
In the review petition, the Islamabad Chief Commissioner argued that the Pakistan Prison Rules, 1978, do not provide for the admission or treatment of a prisoner at a private hospital. According to the plea, prisoners may legally receive treatment in jail hospitals, civil hospitals or district headquarters hospitals.
The petition further contended that transferring a prisoner to a private medical facility could create additional security risks and increase the possibility of external influence. It also argued that a prisoner’s insistence on treatment by a private doctor of his choice was inconsistent with the prison rules.
The plea maintained that government hospitals have highly qualified and experienced doctors, including professors and internationally recognised specialists, capable of providing the required medical care.
The Chief Commissioner also argued that the Supreme Court issued its order without making him a party to the proceedings or providing him an opportunity to be heard. According to the petition, this was inconsistent with the constitutional requirements of fair trial and due process under Article 10-A.
The review petition further stated that the medical board’s report had not described Imran Khan’s condition as critical and argued that a direct decision on his transfer should not have been made without obtaining the opinion of relevant technical experts.
It also questioned the application of Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure to matters concerning jail administration, maintaining that a court hearing a criminal appeal could not exercise powers beyond those provided under the relevant law.
The petition additionally raised objections to provisions relating to prisoners’ movement, meetings and communication, arguing that these rights remain subject to legal restrictions during imprisonment. It maintained that allowing special concessions to one prisoner could raise issues under Article 25 of the Constitution and encourage similar demands from other inmates.
The review plea also argued that granting the final relief sought as interim relief was contrary to established legal principles.
The case has added a new legal dimension to the controversy surrounding Imran Khan’s medical examination and treatment, with the government maintaining that his transfer to PIMS was based on security considerations, while the PTI has accused the authorities of failing to comply with the Supreme Court’s order.
