WITH the Islamabad High Court finding former prime minister Imran Khan’s jail trial in the cipher case illegal, proceedings have gone back to square one. With neither Mr Khan, nor former foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi indicted any longer, they have won themselves momentary respite. Mr Khan had challenged the decision by a single-member IHC bench approving a jail trial. Now the special court formed to try him and others accused will have to hold fresh proceedings. This is an opportunity for the justice system to ensure fairness and transparency in a trial over which much debate and speculation has ensued since Mr Khan and Mr Qureshi’s indictment on Oct 23. Mr Khan was said in the charge sheet to have “illegally retained and wrongly communicated” the cipher, using it for his personal political interests and thereby compromising Pakistan’s security. His FM was charged of abetting him in these acts. It is no secret that Mr Khan repeatedly referred to the cipher as evidence of a conspiracy to remove him, and infamously waved it during a rally to drum up support as the opposition’s no-confidence vote gathered steam. His principal secretary’s statement that he used it to build an “anti-establishment narrative” muddied the waters further.

Mr Khan’s realpolitik notwithstanding the decision to conduct the trial in jail rather than in court was contentious, raising concerns about transparency and whether Mr Khan’s legal rights were being upheld. The manner in which the trial was conducted — much like how Nawaz Sharif’s disqualification rested on a technicality — has all the hallmarks of a witch-hunt rather than a quest for justice. And the timing is eerily similar to the wringer that Mr Sharif was put through: to damage his candidacy just before elections in 2018. But two wrongs don’t make a right. Now that a reset button has been hit, and proceedings will begin anew, justice must not only be ensured, but seen to be ensured. A trial must be held in open court. The accused were high office bearers at one point and must not be tried away from the media’s eye, as the state would try hardened criminals. Where matters of utmost secrecy are to be debated, in-camera proceedings for those limited sessions may be held in a courtroom rather than in prison. History will not view repeated injustices kindly.

Published in Dawn, November 23rd, 2023