Imran Khan, Bushra Bibi sentenced to 14 years in Toshakhana reference

In yet another blow to Imran Khan and his party, the former premier and his wife Bushra Bibi on Wednesday were sentenced to 14 years in jail in the Toshakhana reference.

Last month, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) had filed a fresh reference against the two in an accountability court for retaining a jewellery set received from Saudi crown prince against an undervalued assessment.

---

Key points:

• This is Imran’s third conviction, including the one in the cipher case a day earlier
• He is already out of the race for the February 8 general elections
• “Why are you in a hurry?” Imran asks judge during hearing

---

An Islamabad accountability court had indicted Imran and Bushra in the reference earlier this month. The anti-graft watchdog alleged in the reference that during his term as prime minister, Imran and his wife had received a total of 108 gifts from different heads of state and foreign dignitaries.

The verdict comes eight days before the February 8 general elections, which the PTI is contesting amid a state crackdown and without an electoral symbol.

Today’s conviction is Imran’sthird. A day earlier, a special court established under the Official Secrets Act sentenced Imran and his foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi to 10 years in prison for the breach of state secrets.

Previously, he was convicted in a separate Toshakhana case on Aug 5, and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. The Islamabad High Court (IHC) had suspended his sentence, however, a division bench had later rejected Imran’s petition seeking the suspension of the conviction.

According to the verdict delivered today, Imran and Bushra were barred from holding any public office for 10 years and slapped with a fine of Rs787 million each. While the PTI founder was presented during the hearing, his wife did not appear before the court.

The judge had already closed the right of cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses and asked Imran and his spouse to record their statements under Section 342 (power to examine the accused) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Shahbaz Khosa, PTI lawyer Latif Khosa’s son, had been representing Imran and Bushra in the case. However, when the stage of cross-examining the witnesses arrived, lawyer Zaheer Abbas Chaudhry appeared before the court and submitted a Power of Attorney from Imran.

He sought more time to prepare for the case, at which the prosecution pointed out that Chaudhry was the ninth counsel from the defence side and termed it a part of delaying tactics.

A day ago, after the cipher case proceedings, Bushra Bibi recorded her statement in the Toshakhana case, though Imran could not. During that hearing, Imran’s legal team had requested the court to restore the right of cross-examination but was turned down by the judge.

Today, acco­u­ntabili Judge Moham­mad Bashir conducted the hearing at Rawalpindi’s Adiala Jail, where the former premier is incarcerated.

After his attendance was marked, the court asked him about his statement, to which the former premier replied: “My statement is in the [prison] room. I was only called for marking attendance.”

He was then told to submit his statement immediately and “not waste the court’s time”.

“Why are you in a hurry? Even yesterday, the conviction was announced in haste,” the ex-prime minister said, referring to the verdict in the cipher case.

 

“My lawyers are not here yet. I will submit the statement after showing it to them when they come,” Imran said, adding that he had appeared before the court only to mark his attendance.

He then exited the courtroom, after which the court sentenced the ex-premier and his wife in absentia.

Following the verdict’s announcement, Bushra arrived at Adiala Jail, where the NAB team was already present, to surrender to the authorities following the court’s directives. She was subsequently taken into custody by the anti-graft watchdog.

PTI terms verdict ‘complete destruction of law’

Reacting to the conviction, the PTI said, “Complete destruction of every existing law in Pakistan in two days.”

In a post on X, the party said Imran and his spouse had faced “yet another kangaroo trial in which no right to defence was given to both”.

“Like cipher, this case has no basis to stand in any higher court. It’s shameful how a complete disregard and mockery of the law is in place,” the PTI added.

In another post, it said, “Big question marks arise on our judicial system now. How the cipher and Toshakhana cases were conducted exposed a complete disregard of law by trial court.”

Imran’s sister Aleema Khan said that the “judicial system has buried itself” today.

PTI leader Barrister Gohar Ali Khan said that the conviction was “not only injustice but cruelty”. In an apparent reference to the PML-N, he said the NAB was “withdrawing cases filed against a certain party” but at the same time was handing over “severe punishments just to make one leader happy”.

Speaking to Geo News, he said, “We were not given time, were not given permission for cross-examination, despite there being a lawyer present.”

He claimed that Bushra had “no relation” to the Toshakhana case nor was there any case gift registered in her name.

“This is only to bring Khan sahib under pressure,” he said, advising PTI supporters to remain calm and focus on the upcoming polls.

 

 

Hamid Khan, a senior lawyer and PTI leader, said that two convictions in two days showed how all the laws and procedures of a fair trial were exploited.

“No legal requirements were fulfilled, […] the permission to present witnesses was not provided. The statements under Section 342 were not even recorded properly,” he said while speaking to Geo News.

Hamid said the party would appeal both the cipher and Toshakhana convictions in higher courts, while PTI Secretary General Omar Ayub Khan announced the same.

“We should harness and channel these energies for the polling day on February 8, 2024 by ensuring a massive voter turnout,” Ayub asserted.

“Why does this system want to expose itself so badly? asked PTI’s Taimur Saleem Khan Jhagra, while party leader Shahbaz Gill said the PTI was “hurt” by what was happening but was proud of Imran’s “bravery”.

PTI Senator and lawyer Ali Zafar said the verdict was rushed, adding that if cross-examination was not allowed then the conviction would be regarded as a mistrial.

Speaking to Geo News, he said: “People are not worried by such trials.”

Speaking to the media outside the Islamabad High Court, Zafar said that reports of changing Imran’s counsel were “not correct”.

He said that Shahbaz Khosa had remained the lawyer from the beginning of the Toshakhana trial. He emphasised that there was a team of additional lawyers who were “not replacements” for the main counsel.

Zafar highlighted that Imran and Bushra’s counsels were neither allowed to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses nor were permitted to present their witnesses. The PTI senator said the party was filing an application to obtain a copy of the court order.

PTI lawyer Intazar Hussain Panjutha claimed that there were no witnesses in the cases against Imran, yet he was still given punishment.

‘Certified Toshakhana thief’

Meanwhile, the PML-N’s official X account said that “fake sadiq and ameen” had been proven to be a “certified Toshakhana thief in front of the world today”.

PML-N leader Attaullah Tarar alleged that Imran had a “team that used to sell the items on the black market”, referring to Toshakhana gifts.

Addressing a press conference in Lahore, he claimed that the PTI founder undervalued Toshakhana gifts through local markets and then paid the required 50 per cent tax on that amount.

 

 

“The items were subsequently sold in the black market for a much higher price for profit. Farah Gogi, who’s an absconder in the case, played a key role in it,” the PML-N leader said.

Similarly, PML-N leader Marriyum Aurangzeb alleged that government officials collaborated in the assessment to undervalue the gifts in the Toshakhana reference.

“It was a misuse of authority and they blamed everyone else for it,” she said in a separate press conference.

‘Scales have been balanced’

Reacting to the verdict today, senior journalist Mazhar Abbas said that the timing of the conviction would be discussed in political circles. At the same time, he said he did not expect PTI workers or leaders to react to the conviction.

“The reaction to all of this would be important on February 8. Would they be demoralised and stay in their homes or would they come out politically charged?” he said while speaking to Geo News.

Commenting on the conduct of the PTI’s legal team, Abbas said that there appeared to be a “problem”. He highlighted how several PTI lawyers had come and go, but added that this could also be due to professional differences.

It should be noted that in a recent hearing, Imran had said his lawyers could not appear before the court as they were contesting the upcoming general elections.

Senior journalist Hamir Mir said that today’s verdict was not unexpected for “those in the know”. He said that it was expected for Imran to be convicted in several cases in the run-up to the general elections.

He stated that the “scales have been balanced” now that the same judge who had convicted PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif in 2018 had done the same to Imran. He said that PTI supporters knew that Imran would “ultimately” be convicted before February 8.

Political analyst Mosharraf Zaidi said that “such sentences in such cases” against former premiers had been the norm in Pakistani politics.

“We have seen this in the past that such cases were heard against former premiers and such sentences were given, and then after a while they were released in these cases only,” he said.

Interim Balochistan Information Minister Jan Achakzai said the court decision proved that “no one is above the law and no one can get away with abusing the trust of people”.

Case history

The case, originally filed by ruling party lawmakers, is based on a criminal complaint filed by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

It alleges that Imran had “deliberately concealed” details of the gifts he retained from the Toshaskhana — a repository where presents handed to government officials from foreign officials are kept — during his time as the prime minister and proceeds from their reported sales.

According to Toshakhana rules, gifts/presents and other such materials received by persons to whom these rules apply shall be reported to the Cabinet Division.

Imran has faced a number of legal issues over his retention of gifts. The issue also led to his disqualification by the ECP.

On Oct 21, 2022, the ECP concluded that the former premier had indeed made “false statements and incorrect declarations” regarding the gifts. The watchdog’s order had said Imran stood disqualified under Article 63(1)(p) of the Constitution.

However, the full text of the 36-page order by the ECP was silent on life-time or five-year disqualification for Imran. Subsequently, the then-IHC chief justice had observed that the law did not bar the former premier from contesting polls and the ECP had disqualified him only on his Mianwali seat for “concealing” details of Toshakhana gifts.

Subsequently, the ECP had approached the Islamabad sessions court with a copy of the complaint, seeking proceedings against Imran under criminal law for allegedly misleading officials about the gifts he received from foreign dignitaries during his tenure as the prime minister.

On May 10, 2023, Imran was indicted in the case. However, on July 4, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) had stayed the proceeding and directed Additional and District Session Judge Humayun Dilawar to re-examine the matter in seven days, keeping in view eight legal questions he framed to decide the maintainability of the Toshakhana reference.

The next month, ADSJ Dilawar, while ruling that the reference was maintainable, revi­ved the stalled proceedings and summoned the witne­sses for testimony. The decision was subsequently challenged in the IHC.

Judge Dilawar had then ruled that Imran’s legal team failed to prove the relevance of his witnesses. He had warned the defence counsel to conclude the arguments, or else the court would reserve an order.

In December 2023, the NAB had filed a fresh reference against the two in an accountability court.