PTI leaders, including family members, are raising their voice for getting access to Imran Khan’s doctors
ISLAMABAD:
Since the passage of the 26th Constitution Amendment, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has been struggling not only to secure substantive relief from courts but even to obtain timely fixation of its casesparticularly those involving its founder, Imran Khan, and his spousein the superior judiciary.
The party, whose founder and chief Imran Khan remains incarcerated for over two years, continues to knock on the doors of the judiciary for the hearings on his cases. However, progress has been at a snail’s pace, with the PTI’s petitions still caught in a holding pattern across multiple forums.
At present, PTI leaders, including family members, are raising their voice for getting access to Imran Khan’s doctors for the examination of his eye.
Instead of approaching the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC), PTI lawyers are consistently approaching the Supreme Court, seeking the transfer of Imran Khan to Shifa International Hospital in Islamabad for medical treatment.
It is learnt that the PTI lawyers, namely Barrister Gohar Ayub, Salman Akram Raja, Latif Khosa, Ali Muhammad Khan and others met the SC Registrar for fixation of case related to Imran’s health.
Even K-P Chief Minister Sohail Afridi in Pashto language appealed to Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, seeking the SC intervention on Imran’s health issue.
It is being expected that the SC will fix the matter for hearing next week.
Legal experts believe that after the 27th amendment, the SC has no jurisdiction to give relief in such matter. They say that the SC cannot proceed into the matter against the government’s desire.
Even the executive has an option to challenge the SC proceedings in the FCC wherein judges are appointed by present government.
The SC is likely to take up application filed by Imran Khan’s counsel Latif Khosa next week wherein request has been made that Imran be immediately shifted to Shifa International Hospital for specialised treatment of his eye condition by a retina specialist.
It also sought access for his personal physicians, Dr Faisal Sultan and Dr Asim Yousaf, and requested that his family be permitted to remain present during medical examinations and treatment.
“The petitioner be immediately shifted to Shifa International Hospital, Islamabad, for proper treatment of his eyes from a retina specialist and permit access of his personal physician Dr Faisal Sultan and Dr Asim Yousaf,” the petition stated.
The application described Khan, 73, as being in declining health and said his condition was a matter of serious concern for both his family and the public. It added that he had repeatedly sought access to his personal doctors for independent examination and treatment of his deteriorating eye condition.
It is also requested that Khan’s family members be informed and granted reasonable access during his medical treatment, and that his legal counsel be provided with attested copies of all medical reports and examinations. It further sought regular access for his lawyer to ensure effective legal representation.
The counsel has also moved an early hearing application in SC wherein it is stated that subsequent developments, including medical examinations conducted on February 15 inside Central Jail, Rawalpindi, and on February 23 at PIMS Hospital, without disclosure of medical reports to the petitioner’s counsel or family members, have aggravated the urgency of the matter. Continued uncertainty regarding his medical condition is causing serious concern and apprehension.
Therefore, he requested to fix the matter for next week.
The application states that for the past few months, reports have surfaced across Pakistan raising serious concerns regarding the deterioration of the petitioner’s eyesight and overall health. These reports, coupled with the continued denial of access to family members, have created deep uncertainty.
Under these circumstances, the court was approached for appropriate relief. Your Lordship, vide order dated 10.02.2026, was pleased to appoint Barrister Salman Safdar, ASC, as friend of the Court and permitted him to visit the Petitioner at Central Jail, Rawalpindi, and submit a written report regarding his living conditions and health status.
In compliance of the order, Salman Safdar had submitted report which confirmed that Imran has been left with only approximately 15 percent vision in his right eye. It further records, particularly in paragraph 8, that despite the Petitioner’s repeated complaints of blurred and hazardous vision, no timely or adequate medical intervention was undertaken by the jail authorities, which ultimately resulted in complete loss of vision in one eye”
It is stated that in the backdrop of these alarming findings, it has now transpired that a medical check-up of the petitioner was conducted inside Central Jail, Rawalpindi on 15.02.2026. Shockingly, the said examination was carried out in complete absence of his family members, personal doctors, or legal representatives. “No prior intimation was given to them regarding the said medical check-up”.
“It is being claimed in certain quarters that the family and party members were informed but voluntarily chose not to attend. These assertions are wholly incorrect and unrealistic. At no stage were the Petitioner’s family members, personal physicians, or counsel informed. In fact, when the Petitioner’s sisters approached the authorities, they were denied access. Instead, a panel of handpicked doctors was formed to conduct the examination. The Petitioner’s personal doctors, family members, and legal team were denied access, contrary to the recommendations noted by Barrister Salman Safdar, ASC, friend of the Court, in his report at paragraph 21.”
“The Petitioner has repeatedly sought access to his personal doctors, namely Dr. Faisal Sultan and Dr. Asim Yousaf, for independent examination and treatment of his deteriorating eye condition. Given the findings recorded in the report submitted before this Honourable Court, the conduct of a medical examination in secrecy, without notice to the family or independent doctors, has given rise to serious apprehensions.
“The continued exclusion of the Petitioner’s family and personal medical practitioners from information concerning his health has created unavoidable doubts. Such secrecy not only undermines confidence in the medical process but is also causing unrest and distress among his family members, friends and supporters.”
