The Pakistani federal government filed a review petition Wednesday challenging a Supreme Court order to move jailed former Prime Minister Imran Khan to a private hospital [3].
The legal challenge creates a standoff between the country's highest court and the executive branch over the medical care of a high-profile political prisoner. This dispute highlights the ongoing tension between the government and the former leader's legal team.
The Supreme Court issued its order on Tuesday, Aug. 18, directing that Khan be transferred to Shifa International Hospital in Islamabad [2]. The court order specified that the transfer should be completed within two days [1].
However, the federal government filed its challenge on Aug. 19 [3]. Officials said the former prime minister should be examined and treated at a public hospital rather than a private facility [4].
"He shall be taken to Shifa International Hospital in Islamabad within the next two days," the Supreme Court order stated [1].
A government spokesperson, as reported by AFP, said the government plans to seek a modification of the court's order [2]. The move seeks to prevent the transfer to the private institution in favor of state-run medical services.
The legal battle over Khan's health and detention continues to move through the judiciary. The next hearing regarding this matter is scheduled for Sept. 16 [1].
The government has not provided a specific public hospital alternative in the current filings, but the review petition formally contests the necessity of a private facility for Khan's treatment [4].
“The government argues that the jailed former prime minister should be examined at a public hospital rather than a private one.”
This legal clash underscores the deep institutional friction in Pakistan, where the judiciary and the federal government frequently collide over the treatment of political figures. By challenging the move to a private hospital, the government is likely attempting to maintain stricter control over Khan's environment and limit the influence of external medical staff, while the court is asserting the right to independent medical oversight for detainees.
