Police took ex-Premier Imran Khan of Pakistan into custody in Lahore, following a judicial decree sentencing him to a three-year term for unlawfully trading gifts that belonged to the state.

The 70-year-old, a past cricket star and subsequent political figure, faced allegations of abusing his term from 2018 to 2022, and unlawfully trading gifts that were state property, received during overseas visits. These goods were reportedly valued at over 140 million Pakistani rupees ($497,500).

The Arrest and Charges

Authorities apprehended Khan, the former cricket star-turned-politician, in Lahore following the court’s verdict. Khan had served as the prime minister from 2018 to 2022, during which he allegedly exploited his position to trade state-owned gifts. These items, acquired during international visits, are said to be valued at over 140 million Pakistani rupees (around $497,500).

In his ruling, Judge Humayun Dilawar highlighted Khan’s proven dishonesty and his deliberate concealment of the benefits he gained from the national exchequer. The ruling also imposes a fine of 100,000 rupees ($355). Failure to pay this could result in an additional six months of imprisonment.

Reaction to the Verdict

Law enforcement officials arrested Khan at his home in Lahore, as confirmed by his lawyer, Intezar Panjotha. Following the ruling, Pakistani media outlets reported a heavy police presence around his residence. In response to the verdict, Khan’s legal team is preparing to file an appeal in the high court.

Prior to his arrest, Khan had recorded a video urging his followers to protest. He stressed that his struggle was not personal but for the welfare of the nation and its future generations. He warned against complacency, cautioning that failing to fight for rights would result in a lifetime of subjugation.

In his message, Khan also hinted at a supposed conspiracy, dubbed the “London Plan”, purportedly involving current army chief General Asim Munir and former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, who has been residing in self-imposed exile in London since 2019. Khan, however, has not yet substantiated these claims.

Previous Arrests and Aftermath

This isn’t the first time Khan has been detained this year. His previous arrest and detention on unrelated charges in May sparked severe political unrest, with violent clashes between his supporters and law enforcement.

While commenting on his arrest in an interview with Al Jazeera, Khan maintained that a nation cannot thrive without the rule of law, indicating the current situation in Pakistan resembled more of a “law of the jungle.”

Following Khan’s recent arrest, there have been no immediate reports of widespread protests.

The Case Against Khan

Al Jazeera correspondent Kamal Hyder reported from Islamabad that the prime minister is obligated to store all state gifts safely. However, Khan allegedly sold these gifts for profit. These items reportedly included watches, perfumes, diamond jewellery, and dinner sets, all of which Khan claims to have legally purchased.

Members of Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party criticized the ruling as absurd and unjust. Babar Awan, a PTI member and part of Khan’s legal team, expressed dissatisfaction with the trial process, stating that it violated Khan’s constitutional right to a fair trial.

Given Khan’s absence from court and the unavailability of trials in absentia under Pakistani law, Awan suggested a potential suspension of the verdict and an early release for Khan following an appeal to the high court.

Since his removal from office in April last year, Khan has faced more than 150 cases. Despite denying any wrongdoing and dismissing the charges as politically motivated, a conviction could hinder his prospects of participating in the upcoming national elections, which are due by early November.

Critics of the ruling, including senior PTI leader Asad Umar, continue to voice their objections on social media platforms.

However, Abdul Moiz Jaferii, a lawyer, opined that while Khan’s case appeared stronger compared to other pending charges, the court’s methodology was far from ideal. In his view, the court should have either ordered Khan’s presence or requested police to bring him in. Failure to comply could then legitimize proceeding with the trial in absentia.