FCC says earlier order in Imran’s release case remains in force
• Defers further hearing until after summer recess
• Seeks replies in Radio Pakistan attack case
ISLAMABAD: The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on Tuesday ruled that its earlier direction cautioning against any law and order situation in a case relating to the alleged mobilisation of the ‘Imran Khan Release Force’ remains in force.
A three-judge FCC bench, headed by Chief Justice Aminuddin Khan, made the observation after Advocate Ali Nawaz Kharral, counsel for petitioner Malik Zaheer Ahmed, requested the court to extend its earlier order, expressing apprehensions that the respondents might create a law and order situation.
Responding to the request, the chief justice observed that the respondents would not do so and clarified that the earlier directions were not limited to Tuesday’s hearing but continued to remain effective.
The FCC is hearing a petition filed by Malik Zaheer Ahmed, who challenged the legal status of the movement, arguing that the formation of a force to secure the release of jailed PTI founder Imran Khan violated the Constitution and posed a threat to public order.
At the outset of the hearing, Advocate Ali Bukhari, appearing for PTI leaders, sought time to submit a power of attorney and a reply on behalf of PTI Secretary General Salman Akram Raja.
The counsel informed the court that, besides representing Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi, he had also been engaged that morning to represent the PTI secretary general. He requested additional time to file a reply, describing the petition as politically motivated.
The court accepted the request and adjourned further proceedings until after the summer vacation.
KP chief minister’s response
On Monday, the KP chief minister submitted a reply categorically denying the existence of any armed structure or paramilitary setup. He maintained that the Imran Khan Rehayi Aman Movement was a peaceful, unarmed and voluntary civic initiative aimed at raising awareness about due process of law.
The response stated that the alleged Imran Khan Rehai Force had neither been constituted, notified nor operationalised at any stage, and that no armed structure, organisational militancy, coercive framework or paramilitary setup existed or had ever been contemplated.
It further argued that any earlier reference to the term “force”, if misunderstood, had no legal or factual basis. According to the reply, the initiative was a peaceful political movement intended to promote awareness of due process and the state’s responsibility to ensure fairness in criminal prosecutions.
In his petition, Malik Zaheer Ahmed argued that the chief minister’s announcement regarding the proposed force violated the constitutional oath he took as an MPA and chief minister. He contended that, although no such force had been formally established, the public announcement of its proposed formation and mobilisation had created fear, uncertainty and unrest among the public.
Radio Pakistan attack case
In a separate case, the same bench directed the respondents to file concise statements within two weeks in a petition relating to the May 10, 2023, attack on Radio Pakistan Peshawar, in which Chief Minister Sohail Afridi is among the accused.
The court also ordered that its earlier stay restraining the Special Judge of the Anti-Terrorism Court-III, Peshawar, from proceeding with the trial would continue.
The stay was granted on a petition filed by the Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation (PBC), which sought the transfer of the criminal case from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa to an anti-terrorism court in Islamabad or another province, citing alleged political pressure and executive interference that had undermined the prospects of a fair trial. Notices had earlier been issued to 84 respondents.
Published in Dawn, July 29th, 2026
