Islamabad, March 14 – The Pakistan government has decided to take action against former cricket captain turned politician Imran Khan under cyber crime and defamation laws for what its representatives describe as trying to influence the Supreme Court’s judgement in the Panama Papers case and slandering the reputation of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif through electronic, print and social media.
Addressing a joint press conference on Monday, Minister of State for Information Marriyum Aurangzeb and the ruling PML-N’s MNA Daniyal Aziz said that in his speeches and on the social media, Khan had tried to damage the reputation of the Prime Minister by leveling false allegations against him.
The government had a right to proceed against him under the country’s cyber crime and defamation laws, they added.
Khan is the leader of the Opposition party, Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI).
“We will definitely take action against the PTI leadership,” the minister said, adding that it should not be called political victimisation because the PTI’s campaign against the Prime Minister fell within the purview of cyber crime laws.
She said if the government took action against Khan his party had no justification for raising objections over it.
Aurangzeb said work was under way to prepare a case against the PTI leadership under the cybercrime and defamation laws.
She alleged that Khan and other leaders of his party had committed contempt of court by trying to influence the decision of the apex court in the Panama Papers case.
He alleged that the main objective of the PTI behind the Panama Papers case was to damage the reputation of the prime minister and not a proper investigation into the case.
“Imran Khan has said in a recent statement that even if Nawaz Sharif is exonerated in the Panama Papers case, the stigma of corruption will stick to his political career,” he added.
He accused the PTI leadership of launching a campaign against the prime minister and his family on the media and its purpose was to influence the decision of the apex court in the Panama Papers case.
(With inputs from Dawn)
