Daily Times

The devil lies in the details. There’s a lot that gives a whiff of stale air in what went down in a special court established under the Official Secrets Act on Tuesday.

With both former prime minister Imran Khan and ex-foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi handed a sentence of 10 years for flashing state secrets, that too, one week before the country goes to polls, a festering divide has erupted in the legal fraternity. While some question the political timing of the verdict and others draw parallels with former prime minister Nawaz Sharif’s sentencing in 2018, one thing is certain: the verdict only served to add murkiness to the water. The tenacity of questions making rounds on social media does acknowledge that strong testimonial and corroborative evidence existed against Imran Khan, which could be easily applied to hand in a convincing judgment.

Why the honourable court felt the need to deprive him of his right to legal counsel and hastily wrap up the proceedings, however, is a dilemma that hangs heavy in the air. If the accused’s legal team was allowed a chance to represent him or cross-examine witnesses or the proceedings conducted in an open court, this sense of ambiguity could easily be removed.

A prime minister doing politics at the unaffordable price of Pakistan’s standing in the international community and its diplomatic ties with key powers was in no position to evade accountability. That an audio leak soon saw Mr Khan telling his then-principal secretary Azam Khan to “play up” the threat and turn it into a foreign plot to oust his government considerably added to his troubles. But the manner in which this was done has only exacerbated the prevailing uncertainty; not bringing us any closer to closure.

It can only be hoped that the long order would comprehensively explain the rationale: under which section of the Official Secrets Act were they tried. *