Review sought against SC order on Imran hospital transfer

The Islamabad chief commissioner has challenged the Supreme Court's order permitting Imran Khan's transfer to a private hospital. The review petition argues the ruling violates prison rules, due process and equality principles. ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad chief commissioner has moved the Supreme Court for a review of its order allowing Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan to be shifted to a private hospital, arguing that the ruling contained legal flaws and was inconsistent with prison regulations. The Supreme Court had on Tuesday directed that the former prime minister be transferred from Adiala jail to Shifa International Hospital, a demand long pressed by his family and party on health grounds. However, authorities later took him to the state-run Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (Pims) under strict security on Thursday night, shortly before the expiry of the 48-hour deadline set by the court. Imran Khan, 73, has been imprisoned in Rawalpindi since August 2023 after convictions in multiple cases. He and his party have maintained that the cases were politically motivated and followed his removal from office in 2022. Grounds cited in review petition According to the review plea filed against the Supreme Court's August 18 order, the Pakistan Prison Rules, 1978 do not provide for treatment of a prisoner at a private hospital. The petition says a prisoner may only be treated inside jail or at a civil or district headquarters hospital under the law. The plea further argues that shifting a prisoner to a private medical facility would raise security concerns and increase the possibility of outside influence. It also says a prisoner's insistence on treatment by a private doctor of choice does not conform to prison rules, while maintaining that government doctors include highly experienced professors and internationally recognised specialists. The chief commissioner has also contended that the Supreme Court passed the order without impleading him in the case or issuing notice to him. The petition argues that deciding the matter without hearing the other side ran contrary to Article 10-A of the Constitution. It also says the medical board's report did not describe Imran Khan's condition as critical, and argues that the court should not have taken a direct decision on the basis of the medical report alone without first obtaining the opinion of technical experts. Additional legal objections The review petition further maintains that Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not applicable to matters relating to jail administration. It argues that a court hearing a criminal appeal cannot exercise powers not provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure. The plea states that a prisoner's movement and meetings are legally restricted during incarceration. It also argues that permitting a prisoner two foreign telephone calls per week would be in violation of Rule 265 of the Prison Rules. In addition, the petition says the grant of final relief in the form of interim relief was against settled legal principles. It also contends that extending special concessions to one inmate would be inconsistent with the principle of equality under Article 25 of the Constitution, and could lead other prisoners to seek the same treatment.