An Islamabad anti-terrorism court (ATC) granted the capital police a two-day physical remand of PTI President Parvez Elahi in a newly surfaced terror case dated back to March 18. This development occurred shortly after Elahi's release following the suspension of his detention under the Maintenance of Public Order (MPO) ordinance by the Islamabad High Court (IHC).
Parvez Elahi has faced multiple arrests, with this latest one marking the 11th in various cases since June, following a widespread crackdown on the PTI following the May 9 violence incident. The posts on X (formerly Twitter) by Islamabad police, announcing Elahi's release and re-arrest, occurred within a mere eight-minute time difference.
The police clarified that he was detained in a case registered at the Counter Terrorism Department (CTD) police station.
During a court appearance at the Federal Judicial Complex (FJC), Elahi expressed his stance, highlighting his overnight detention at the Crime Investigation Agency police station and his reluctance to meet anyone. He firmly denied any plans for a press conference, reminiscent of several PTI leaders quitting the party post-May 9 incidents.
At the outset of the hearing, Elahi's lawyers submitted a power of attorney. During the proceedings, Advocate Sardar Abdur Razzaq and defense counsel Ali Bukhari represented Elahi, while Prosecutor Tahir Kazim represented the police.
The police requested a 14-day physical remand for the former Punjab chief minister, but his lawyers opposed it, emphasizing that the case against Elahi was politically motivated and based on flimsy grounds. They cited the IHC's suspension of his detention under the MPO and the Lahore High Court's order against further arrests of Elahi. They argued that his human rights were being violated, and the police had disregarded court orders.
Razzaq asserted that Parvez Elahi's name wasn't even in the March 18 FIR, as it was filed against unidentified suspects. He claimed that the incident took place when Elahi was in Lahore and questioned the notion of labeling a prominent political figure as an "unknown" individual.
Bukhari echoed these concerns, emphasizing that there was no apparent need for Elahi's remand, as the police lacked substantial evidence for an investigation. He criticized the lack of a clear reason for the remand request and called attention to the case's dubious nature.
In essence, both lawyers argued that the case against Parvez Elahi was politically motivated, lacked merit, and violated his rights, urging the court to discharge him from the case.