SINCE Pakistan’s establishment in 1947, the Office of the Prime Minister has been a focal point of judicial scrutiny. The judiciary has frequently intervened, resulting in the conviction and disqualification of several Prime Ministers—developments that have not only shaped their political destinies but also left an indelible mark on the nation’s democratic fabric. The founder of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and the country’s first democratically-elected Prime Minister, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s leadership ended with his overthrow in a military coup by General Zia-ul-Haq in 1977. Subsequently, Bhutto was arrested and tried for the murder of Nawab Mohammad Ahmed Khan Kasuri. The trial, widely criticized for its political undertones, culminated in his conviction and execution on April 4, 1979, a decision that remains one of the most contentious in Pakistan’s judicial history. Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan’s first female Prime Minister, faced judicial scrutiny during her tenure and beyond. Although her governments were dismissed twice on charges of corruption and mismanagement, it was during her years in opposition that the judiciary convicted her. In 1999, an accountability court convicted her in absentia on corruption charges, sentencing her to five years in prison and barring her from holding public office. However, this verdict was later overturned in 2001 due to insufficient evidence and procedural flaws.
Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, another prominent figure, served as Prime Minister during three non-consecutive terms (1990–1993, 1997–1999, and 2013–2017). His political career was marred by multiple convictions. During his second term as Prime Minister, a military coup led to his ousting on October 12, 1999. He was later convicted by an anti-terrorism court for hijacking and terrorism charges related to his attempt to deny landing rights to a plane carrying General Pervez Musharraf. This resulted in a life sentence which was commuted following a deal leading to his exile. Sharif’s third tenure ended in 2017 when the Supreme Court disqualified him from office. The disqualification was based on corruption charges linked to his undisclosed Aqama (residency permit) rather than the Panama Papers. While his name appeared in the Panama Papers, no evidence of direct wrongdoing was found and he was disqualified solely on the grounds of the Aqama, with the verdict issued on July 28, 2017. Subsequently, an accountability court sentenced him to 10 years in prison in the Avenfield reference case.
Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani, who served as Prime Minister from 2008 to 2012, was disqualified by the Supreme Court on June 19, 2012. The disqualification resulted from his refusal to write a letter to Swiss authorities to reopen corruption cases against the then President Asif Ali Zardari. The court held Gillani in contempt, ending his tenure and setting a precedent for judicial oversight of executive compliance. Raja Pervez Ashraf, Gillani’s successor, also faced legal challenges. Though he completed his term, he was implicated in the Rental Power Projects corruption case. While investigations and trials continue, his name remains associated with allegations of financial irregularities during his tenure as Prime Minister. Imran Khan, the leader of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), served as Prime Minister from 2018 to 2022 and became yet another victim of Pakistan’s political-judicial entanglements. In 2023, he was convicted in the Toshakhana case, accused of concealing details of state gifts and selling them unlawfully. This conviction resulted in a three-year prison sentence and his disqualification from elections. Although the conviction was later suspended, Khan continues to face numerous legal challenges.
On January 17, 2025, the judiciary convicted former Prime Minister Imran Khan on charges of financial misconduct and abuse of power. This conviction, announced by a special accountability court, involved allegations of misusing public funds for personal gains during their tenure. The court sentenced the individual to 14 years in prison, along with a hefty fine and disqualification from holding public office. The verdict was seen as part of the judiciary’s ongoing efforts to ensure accountability among the country’s political elite, but it also sparked debates about the impartiality of the decision. The overarching narrative of these convictions reveals a pattern in which judicial actions are often closely tied to political conflicts. While some leaders faced genuine charges of corruption or misconduct, others were seemingly targeted through politically motivated cases. The recurring legal battles of the country’s leaders reflect the fragile state of governance and accountability in Pakistan, raising questions about the impartiality of judicial processes and the overarching influence of political agendas.
The Quran and Hadith emphasize the principles of justice and impartiality in governance. Surah An-Nisa (4:135) commands believers to stand firm in justice, even against themselves or their kin. The Last Prophet (PBUH) highlighted the perils of selective accountability, stating: “The people before you were destroyed because they inflicted legal punishments on the poor and forgave the rich” (Sahih Bukhari). These teachings underscore the need for equitable and unbiased justice, a standard against which judicial actions must be measured. While the judiciary’s role in holding Prime Ministers accountable is vital for ensuring the rule of law, it has often been criticized for overreach and selective application of justice. Allegations of judicial activism have at times undermined public confidence in its impartiality. Ensuring that judicial actions align with Quranic principles of justice and transparency is essential for strengthening democracy and fostering trust in state institutions.
—The writer is contributing columnist, based in Islamabad.
(ememiqbal68@gmail.com)
