- PTI founder briefly joined hearing via video link, prompting lawyers walk out after voice disruption and blurred visuals
- Defence calls trial ‘unfair,’ seeks open hearing and private access, as ATC recorded statements of eight witnesses despite boycott
- Court dismisses Imran’s pleas seeking CCTV footage, halt of trial in GHQ attack case
RAWALPINDI: Lawyers representing PTI founder and former prime minister Imran Khan boycotted proceedings of the Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) on Tuesday after their client Imran Khan was presented before the court through a WhatsApp video link from Adiala Jail.
The court was hearing a case relating to the May 9, 2023 attack on the army’s General Headquarters (GHQ), which followed Imran’s arrest and sparked violent protests across the country, during which state buildings and military installations were torched.
Last week, the ATC had dismissed a plea for Imran’s in-person appearance, instead allowing his participation via a WhatsApp call. During Tuesday’s hearing, however, Imran’s voice repeatedly broke and his face appeared blurred, prompting his lawyers — Salman Akram Raja and Faisal Malik — to walk out of the proceedings, terming the process “unfair.”
Despite their boycott, ATC Judge Amjad Ali Shah went ahead with the hearing and recorded statements of eight witnesses, including officials from PEMRA, the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), and the Pakistan Information Department. PTI’s legal team rejected the move, arguing that witness statements should not be recorded under such conditions.
Later, the court adjourned the hearing until September 27, with more witnesses summoned.
Indictment and detention
Imran Khan was indicted in the case on December 5, 2023. He has been incarcerated in Adiala Jail since August 2023 and was formally arrested in the May 9 protest case in January 2024.
PTI lawyers’ objections
Speaking to the media after the boycott, Raja said: “A mobile phone was placed before Khan sahib in jail, and a video call was made. The judge received the call on his phone, but Khan sahib could not hear what was being said in court, nor could the courtroom hear him.”
عمران خان صاحب کے سامنے جیل میں سیل فون رکھا گیا اور جج صاحب کے فون پر وٹس ایپ کال کی گئی اس میں نہ خان صاحب کی جج صاحب تک آواز آرہی تھی نہ جج صاحب کی خان صاحب کو آواز جارہی تھی یہ کسی بھی طرح فیر ٹرائل نہیں ہے جب عمران خان کو اپنا موقف پیش کرنے کا موقع ہی نہ دیا جائے۔
ہم خان… pic.twitter.com/puBIR1VbRc
— PTI (@PTIofficial) September 23, 2025
He argued that Imran remained unaware of witness testimonies and that his legal team was denied the opportunity to speak to him privately. “The judge said we could not talk because the link was too weak. This right, too, was denied,” Raja claimed.
The counsel said they had filed an application before the ATC, while also moving a plea before the Lahore High Court’s Rawalpindi bench against what they called an unfair process.
“We have conveyed to the court that it is not possible for us to remain a part of this process. There should be an open trial, and the accused must be given the chance to consult his lawyers,” Raja stressed.
ATC Rawalpindi dismisses petitions filed on behalf of PTI founder
In related development, the ATC Rawalpindi dismissed both petitions filed on behalf of the PTI founder Imran Khan in the May 9 GHQ attack case.
The case was heard by ATC Judge Amjad Ali Shah. PTI founder’s counsels, Faisal Malik and Salman Akram Raja, appeared before the court, while special prosecutors Zaheer Shah and Ikram Amin Minhas appeared with their team.
The PTI founder’s lawyers had filed two petitions: one seeking provision of CCTV footage and court proceedings of September 19, and the other requesting suspension of proceedings until the High Court’s orders on transferring the trial to jail.
Lawyer Faisal Malik argued that they could not participate in the proceedings without consultation with their client. The court responded that the PTI founder had already boycotted the proceedings during the previous hearing after being connected, and advised them to challenge the matter of WhatsApp communication in the High Court.
Faisal Malik maintained that they had already challenged it, arguing that a WhatsApp call could not be considered equivalent to a video link. He requested time to challenge the earlier order of the court. However, the judge stated that proceedings could not be halted. Prosecutor Ikram Amin Minhas argued that the defense had boycotted earlier hearings and was now only trying to delay the trial, stressing that prosecution witnesses still had to be recorded.
