PTI Chairman Gohar Khan has expressed his hope that the Supreme Court would save democracy and it would not be derailed.

“The Supreme Court will tell why it thought. We are all the time in the SC in order to save it from getting derailed,” he said when asked why the apex court that the party wanted to derail democracy.

He was speaking to reporters outside the Adiala Jail in Rawalpindi on Saturday. Gohar, who succeeded Imran Khan as the party chairman, was answering queries against the backdrop of Supreme Court decision to suspend the Lahore High Court decision.

A three-member SC bench led by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah suspended the LHC order on Friday which stayed the appointment of district returning officers (DROs), ROs, and assistant returning officers (AROs) from the executive.

The top court also ordered the Election Commission of Pakistan to issue a schedule for the general elections. Moments later, the polls overseer issued the schedule. The commission will accept nomination papers from December 20 to 22.

Moreover, the SC has sought a response from PTI’s Umair Khan Niazi, who challenged the appointment of bureaucrats as returning officers for polls, as it issued the written order of the case.

In response to a query, he said that no lawyer appears on first day as per the working of the Supreme Court.

Gohar clarified that the party does not want election delay and demanded that the presence of returning officers (from executive) would show that elections would not be free and fair. The PTI has called for appointing ROs from the judiciary.

When asked, he said that his party was under pressure and it was the basic right of a citizen to contest election and approach the apex court.

“Our petition was that the returning officers should be from the judiciary instead that they would be deputy commissioner,” he said.

While speaking about the cases against party’s founder Imran Khan, he claimed that they were bogus and it was political victimisation.

He was of the view that the jail trial cannot take place and the alleged that the notification was wrong and a violation of fundamental rights.