A court in Islamabad granted the former prime minister of Pakistan a temporary freedom period of two weeks this Friday, following a court decision that appeared to reset the immediate legal timeline for one of the country’s most controversial political figures. The postponement came a day after the Supreme Court stated that Tuesday’s arrest was illegal, signaling a shift in how the judiciary views the ongoing legal challenges surrounding the former leader. The two-week window is framed as a protective measure amid a suite of pending cases and the potential for further legal action, giving the former prime minister a brief reprieve from the escalating cycle of scrutiny and protest that has characterized his public life in recent years.
According to reports, the alleged case centers on a controversial land transaction connected to Al Qadir University, with allegations that land was surrendered in a way that would benefit the institution in exchange for the return of funds seized from a businessman in the United Kingdom. Supporters of the former prime minister have framed these allegations as a political vendetta, arguing that legal actions surrounding the land deal are part of a broader pattern of pressure against a political figure who remains a potent force in national politics. The two-week protection period is being portrayed by critics as a temporary bulwark against what they see as a pattern of targeted prosecutions that intensify during times of political tension and public mobilization.
The day of the hearing, large gatherings formed outside the court complex as backers offered loud demonstrations in favor of the former prime minister. Media outlets, including the Geo TV network, described a blend of public display and heightened security, with authorities reinforcing the area around the courthouse to manage the crowd and ensure order. The proceedings themselves were interrupted by chants and slogans supporting the former leader, and the judge ultimately decided to adjourn the session, citing the need for additional preparation and the gathering pace of related legal matters. The atmosphere around the case reflected a nation deeply divided on the role of the judiciary and the stability of democratic processes, with citizens watching closely as one of the country’s most recognizable political figures navigates repeated legal challenges amid ongoing political tension.
The former prime minister, who was removed from office in October 2022 following a vote of no confidence, has consistently argued that the multiple lawsuits lodged against him are rooted in political pressure rather than legitimate legal concerns. In comments made to local media, he described the unfolding events as an attempt to derail his political movement and challenge the will of his supporters. He described the Tuesday arrest as an act of coercion and asserted that the rule of law must prevail over what he characterizes as a climate of intimidation. Critics of his position contend that the legal process is independent, with courts tasked to weigh evidence without political interference, even as heated political rhetoric continues to shape public perception. This framing underscores a broader debate about how legal accountability is pursued in a country where political passions run high and legal institutions are under intense public scrutiny, especially during periods of political transition and contestation.