ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) decision to name Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif in a contempt petition over the non-implementation of the Supreme Court’s order concerning Imran Khan’s transfer to Shifa International Hospital has triggered debate within and outside the party.
The controversy stems from the fact that Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi was not included as a respondent, while the interior secretary was named in the petition.
According to sources familiar with the matter, the issue was discussed during a PTI parliamentary party meeting. The party’s chairman, Barrister Gohar Ali Khan, had reportedly stressed that the case should remain focused on the legal enforcement of the Supreme Court’s order rather than becoming a political confrontation.
The Supreme Court had issued an order on August 18 directing that Imran Khan be shifted to Shifa International Hospital and provided medical treatment according to arrangements specified by the court.
PTI Chairman Wanted Legal Focus
Sources said Barrister Gohar had emphasised that the purpose of the contempt proceedings should be to ensure implementation of the court’s directions for Imran’s treatment.
According to the sources, the argument was that the proceedings should not primarily be used to seek punishment for political figures but should instead focus on identifying the administrative authorities responsible for implementing the judicial order.
The discussion reportedly included the view that officials such as the interior secretary and principal secretary to the prime minister could be more directly relevant to implementation than senior political figures.
The reasoning, according to the sources, was that naming both the prime minister and interior minister could give the proceedings a more political appearance and potentially shift attention away from the central issue of enforcing the court’s order.
However, when the petition was ultimately prepared, Shehbaz Sharif was included while Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi was omitted.
Sources said members of the parliamentary party were themselves unclear about the reason for the omission.
Legal Team Gives Different Explanation
PTI’s legal team has provided a different explanation for the decision.
Barrister Salman Akram Raja said a person should only be named as a respondent if there is evidence linking that individual to the decision or action that allegedly resulted in non-compliance with the Supreme Court’s order.
According to this position, the interior secretary was included because of the alleged administrative role involved, while Naqvi was not named because sufficient evidence had not been established connecting him directly to the decision in question.
The distinction has become an important part of the debate surrounding PTI’s petition.
PTI Files Contempt Petition Over Alleged Breach of SC Order on Imran Khan’s Hospital Transfer
Who Has Been Named in the Petition?
The contempt petition was filed by Imran Khan’s sister, Uzma Khan, through her lawyer Uzair Karamat Bhandari.
The petition names Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, the law and information ministers, Islamabad’s chief commissioner, the interior secretary, the Punjab inspector general of prisons and the superintendent of Adiala Jail.
It seeks contempt proceedings against those allegedly responsible for failing to comply with the Supreme Court’s direction. It also asks for immediate steps to ensure implementation of the order concerning Imran Khan’s transfer to Shifa International Hospital.
The omission of the interior minister has therefore attracted particular attention because of his senior position in the federal government.
Government Challenges Supreme Court Order
Meanwhile, the federal government has challenged the Supreme Court’s original order.
The government maintains that security concerns prevented Imran Khan from being transferred to Shifa International Hospital. According to the government’s position, PTI workers allegedly created a security situation that made the proposed transfer difficult.
Instead, Imran was taken to the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) for a medical examination before being returned to Adiala Jail.
The competing positions of PTI and the government have consequently placed the issue before the courts, where the legal question of compliance with the Supreme Court’s order remains central.
Legal Enforcement or Political Action?
The controversy has now developed into a broader debate over the purpose of PTI’s contempt proceedings.
On one side, party sources maintain that the primary objective was to secure implementation of the Supreme Court’s order rather than target political personalities.
On the other, the composition of the petition — particularly the inclusion of the prime minister and exclusion of the interior minister — has prompted questions about how the legal strategy was ultimately formulated.
For PTI, the distinction could be significant. If the proceedings are primarily about enforcement, the focus would remain on the officials and administrative mechanisms responsible for carrying out the court’s directions. If the case instead develops into an attempt to hold political figures personally responsible, it could take on a considerably more contentious political dimension.
The matter is therefore likely to remain under scrutiny as the courts consider the petition and the government’s position on Imran Khan’s proposed transfer.
