Former Special Assistant to prime minister Attaullah Tarar said that the Supreme Court’s remarks in the Toshakhana case had essentially issued the decision in the case.

Speaking in Faisla Aap Ka with Asma Shirazi, Tarar said that the Toshakhana trial was spread over 11 months and had even involved an attack on the courtroom prompting him to request a transfer.

He added that the case only had two to four witnesses but PTI had resorted to creating ‘fake’ Facebook posts and abuses being hurled inside the courtroom.

Tarar said that Imran had requested exemption in the trial 40 times. He referred to Imran as a ‘bully’ who always gets his way. He added that Imran had nine different petitions had been filed in the Islamabad High Court to delay the case.

He added that the Supreme Court had done everything short of physically releasing Imran from the case. He said that the SC had bound the lower court by showing where its thinking was headed.

Shahadat Awan said that not just lawyers but even the common man knew that the Supreme Court should not issue such remarks as it did on Wednesday. He said that after the remarks, there was no room left for the lower courts to decide the case.

Awan added that the the remarks set a bad precedent because it would undoubtedly influence the high court.

Ahmad Awais said that it was a routine matter for judges to give their observations on different aspects of a case during a hearing.

He said that Imran Khan’s right to fair trial had been denied when the court refused to permit his witnesses in the Toshakhana case.

Awais added that if a judge was prone to being influenced by the remarks of the Supreme Court, they were not worthy of being called a judge.

Tarar added that even if the Supreme Court had to issue such remarks, the time for them was when the it received an appeal after it went through the Islamabad High Court.

He said that the chief justice had resorted to ‘mother in law’ instead of rule of law after seeing that his date of retirement was at hand.

Awan said that the respect of courts was bound on every citizen but everyone still has the right to their opinion. He reiterated that the observations should not have been made because they could influence the lower court.

He said that instead, the SC should have waited for Thursday’s hearing simply by adjourning. Awan added that adding a timeframe was also very peculiar.

Awais said that the decision in the Toshakhana case amounted to flagrant violation of the constitution and judicial misconduct. He added that while the judge had authority to make decision, he shold not have bypassed due procedure.

Tarar said if the chief justice has spoken on behalf of the petitioner’s lawyer, the decision has alredy been pronounced. He added that there is no judge brave enough to disagree with the decision in the lower court.

Awan said that there were also murmurs in some parts of the lawyer fraternity that the bench should be changed after today’s remarks. He said that it is not a simple matter to dimiss the case on technical matter, and cases can be transferred to other courts as well.

He said that in addition to influencing the court, the right of prosecution has also been harmed.