The two-day-long clash between former Pakistan Prime Minister and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) workers with its chairman Imran Khan’s supporters and the law enforcers at the Zaman Park deepened the ongoing political and economic crisis of the country, reported The Nation.
Clashes broke out on Tuesday after the police stormed Khan’s residence to arrest him to execute a non-bailable arrest warrant issued by a local court of Islamabad in the Toshakhana case.
The high drama that continued for nearly 24 hours has only added more confusion and uncertainty about the present set-up and the fate of the general elections in the two provincial assemblies.
In the midst of a crippling economic crisis, the political polarization in the country has reached new heights. The policy confrontation between Imran Khan and the ruling Pakistan Democratic Movement, a coalition of ruling parties, has now taken the shape of a vendetta, according to The Nation.
Meanwhile, Additional District and Sessions Judge Zafar Iqbal announced the verdict reserved earlier redirecting the authorities concerned to arrest the former prime minister and present him before the court on March 18.
Scores of people, including police personnel and PTI workers, were injured in the process as the law enforcers fired teargas and party supporters resorted to throwing Molotov cocktails.
Legal proceedings against Khan began after he was ousted from office in a parliamentary vote early last year. Since then, he has held nationwide protest rallies demanding a snap election, during one of which he was shot and wounded, The Nation reported.
According to Geo News, the written verdict against Imran Khan’s plea said, “[…] it is concluded that the application is not justified by law as well as fact which is hereby rejected”.
Gew News reported that the verdict mentioned that the applicant has “prayed that in view of the undertaking given by him and the sureties offered by him to the satisfaction of this court, the order dated 13.03.2023 may kindly be recalled and suspend the warrant of arrest.”
“Keeping in view the law and order situation created by the applicant, he has lost some of the normal rights granted by procedural as well as substantive laws and he has to actually surrender before the court due to his defiance of the court process,” the verdict further read.
“Such eventuality is never appreciated by the court and it is regarded as willful default.”