LONDON: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf chief Imran Khan has launched a legal action against The Sunday Times after the paper wrote that Khan was recently introduced to Cameron Munter, American Ambassador to Pakistan, in the presence of General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) chief, and that he has gained the backing of Pakistan military.
The News has learnt that Imran Khan’s solicitor in London Mahtab Aziz of ST Law Solicitors has written to the Rupert Murdoch title that The Sunday Times Article ‘Imran the Inevitable’ damaged Khan’s “political standing and reputation among the Pakistani public by implying that he is backed by the Pakistan Army which directly goes against Khan’s principles and political ideology that he stands for and for which he has made many sacrifices.”
The lawsuit stresses that Khan will always be an independent political campaigner free from “any influence by the vested interests of Pakistan’s powerful military and establishment.” Imran Khan (‘The Claimant’) of ‘The Justice Party’ has taken a big issue with the article’s main theme accusing the paper of going “against the grain of our client’s political vision.”
“There is neither any support for Khan’s campaign by Pakistan’s security establishment and nor have you furnished any evidence to support it,” says the lawsuit, adding that the PTI believed that change in Pakistan can come by “severing the shackles of the establishment.”
The lawsuit gives a reference to Cameron Munter’s denial on the Capital Talk and military spokesman Major General Ather Abbas denial that any such meeting was ever facilitated. The defamation claim says that Khan met Munter on various occasions but the “factual inaccuracy” in reporting has “damaged our client’s standing among the Pakistani public as it implies that there is tacit support for Khan’s campaign not only by the United States but also by Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI).”
“This is particularly of some concern as it goes completely against Khan’s long term outspoken campaign for Pakistan to be free from any outside influence especially that of the United States. He has campaigned tirelessly for a halt to US drone attacks which have resulted in many civilian and military lives being lost.”
Khan’s lawyers maintain that the article is of great and immediate concern to Khan and has resulted in untoward criticism being directed at him by his opposition parties to the effect that he has been labelled “a puppet/agent of the United States”, of “secret hand” propping up his political ambitions.
“This can have catastrophic consequences for Khan’s political campaign as it substantially plays in to the hands of his critics and thereby affording them a false platform upon which to seriously damage Khan’s standing amongst the Pakistani public and his political credibility.”
The article stated that Khan is reluctant to criticise the military establishment publicly, but he emphasises that he will not be a puppet of the generals. “Obviously you have to work with them but it doesn’t mean you have to work under them,” he reportedly said but Khan maintains in the lawsuit that this is “an unsupported comment” as he has been a “vehement critic” of General Musharraf and his policies and has not been reluctant in the past to criticise the military and is not reluctant in the present to do so.
The lawsuit has asked the paper to “retract” the “offending parts of your article by publishing a retraction”; issue a “suitable apology to Imran Khan on your front page”; pay Khan’s “legal costs” and respond within 7 days or else Khan will issue “court proceedings” against the Sunday paper.
The News has learnt that Imran Khan’s solicitor in London Mahtab Aziz of ST Law Solicitors has written to the Rupert Murdoch title that The Sunday Times Article ‘Imran the Inevitable’ damaged Khan’s “political standing and reputation among the Pakistani public by implying that he is backed by the Pakistan Army which directly goes against Khan’s principles and political ideology that he stands for and for which he has made many sacrifices.”
The lawsuit stresses that Khan will always be an independent political campaigner free from “any influence by the vested interests of Pakistan’s powerful military and establishment.” Imran Khan (‘The Claimant’) of ‘The Justice Party’ has taken a big issue with the article’s main theme accusing the paper of going “against the grain of our client’s political vision.”
“There is neither any support for Khan’s campaign by Pakistan’s security establishment and nor have you furnished any evidence to support it,” says the lawsuit, adding that the PTI believed that change in Pakistan can come by “severing the shackles of the establishment.”
The lawsuit gives a reference to Cameron Munter’s denial on the Capital Talk and military spokesman Major General Ather Abbas denial that any such meeting was ever facilitated. The defamation claim says that Khan met Munter on various occasions but the “factual inaccuracy” in reporting has “damaged our client’s standing among the Pakistani public as it implies that there is tacit support for Khan’s campaign not only by the United States but also by Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI).”
“This is particularly of some concern as it goes completely against Khan’s long term outspoken campaign for Pakistan to be free from any outside influence especially that of the United States. He has campaigned tirelessly for a halt to US drone attacks which have resulted in many civilian and military lives being lost.”
Khan’s lawyers maintain that the article is of great and immediate concern to Khan and has resulted in untoward criticism being directed at him by his opposition parties to the effect that he has been labelled “a puppet/agent of the United States”, of “secret hand” propping up his political ambitions.
“This can have catastrophic consequences for Khan’s political campaign as it substantially plays in to the hands of his critics and thereby affording them a false platform upon which to seriously damage Khan’s standing amongst the Pakistani public and his political credibility.”
The article stated that Khan is reluctant to criticise the military establishment publicly, but he emphasises that he will not be a puppet of the generals. “Obviously you have to work with them but it doesn’t mean you have to work under them,” he reportedly said but Khan maintains in the lawsuit that this is “an unsupported comment” as he has been a “vehement critic” of General Musharraf and his policies and has not been reluctant in the past to criticise the military and is not reluctant in the present to do so.
The lawsuit has asked the paper to “retract” the “offending parts of your article by publishing a retraction”; issue a “suitable apology to Imran Khan on your front page”; pay Khan’s “legal costs” and respond within 7 days or else Khan will issue “court proceedings” against the Sunday paper.
0 comments:
Post a Comment