RAWALPINDI: PTI founder Imran Khan has accepted the Supreme Court’s (SC) suggestion and is prepared to engage in conditional talks with all political parties, including PML-N and PPP.
To move forward, the incarcerated former prime minister will write to the Supreme Court seeking guidance on the matter.
The party leadership has been tasked with drafting this letter, which will outline the current political and economic challenges facing the country.
The letter will also demand fair trials for PTI leaders and workers who are either imprisoned or facing charges related to the May 9 violence and other incidents. The party’s legal committee is set to finalize the draft of the letter today.
Sources said that PTI is willing to enter into serious and meaningful dialogue with ‘authorized representatives’ of political parties.
The Supreme Court had advised Imran Khan to initiate talks with other politicians during a court session discussing accountability laws.
Imran Khan addressed the court via video link from Adiala Central Jail during the hearing of the government’s intra-court appeal against the Supreme Court decision concerning amendments to the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO).
Imran Khan spoke for about 35 minutes before the larger bench headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, with Justices Aminuddin Khan, Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Athar Minallah, and Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi also present.
During his address, the former prime minister claimed that the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) was not under his control during PTI's tenure. He explained that when there is a dispute between the government and the opposition over the appointment of the NAB chairman, a designated ‘third umpire’ intervenes to make the appointment.
Justice Mandokhel expressed concern over Imran’s statements, suggesting that if the situation was so dire, he should sit down with fellow politicians to resolve the issues.
He urged Imran Khan to lead his party and engage in dialogue, emphasizing that if something were to happen to the country, the responsibility would lie with the politicians, not the judges.
