The judiciary under the hybrid system has reached a new low in terms of inefficiency, as the appeal against the conviction of former Prime Minister Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi in the Al-Qadir Trust case, filed in Islamabad High Court, is about to mark one year of delays. The timeline of the case is as follows:
On January 17, the Accountability Court sentenced Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi in the Al-Qadir Trust case. The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party filed appeals against the verdict on January 25. However, just four days later, the High Court returned the appeals due to objections. The appeals were refiled on January 31, only for Justice Sardar Muhammad Aslam to schedule the first hearing on March 25, 54 days later.
On this date, Salman Akram Raja appeared for the defense, but time was requested until the counsel for the defense, Salman Safdar, could return from the Supreme Court to the Islamabad High Court. Chief Justice Sarfraz Dogar rejected the request and postponed the hearing.
The second hearing was scheduled for April 17, 24 days later, during which the court instructed the office to resolve objections and de-listed the case.
The third hearing took place on April 30, 13 days later, with Latif Khosa representing the defense. The case was once again postponed after the objections were cleared, and the hearing was rescheduled.
The fourth hearing was held on May 15, 15 days after the previous one, during which notices were issued.
The fifth hearing, which took place on June 5, saw the NAB prosecutor requesting more time, and the case was once again delayed.
During the sixth hearing on June 11, Justices Muhammad Asif went on leave, causing further delay.
The seventh hearing took place on June 26, 15 days later, with the NAB prosecutor requesting an additional two weeks. Chief Justice Sarfraz Dogar granted a three-month extension.
The eighth hearing, which was scheduled for September 26, was delayed when the NAB prosecutor fell ill.
The ninth hearing, set for October 16, also faced a delay as Chief Justice Sarfraz Dogar was unavailable due to a prior dinner engagement.
Throughout the prolonged process, Salman Safdar has repeatedly claimed that he could wrap up the case in just 20 minutes if given the chance to present his arguments.
The repeated delays and inefficiencies have turned what should have been a straightforward case into a year-long ordeal, causing frustration and raising questions about the functioning of the judiciary under the hybrid system.