Imran Khan: Misleading Definitions.

PTI chief's controversial statement does not fall within the mischief of terrorism. An SC judgement, and UN, US and FBI definitions are in favour of Khan. The popularity of PTI chief Imran Khan has skyrocketed whilst political tensions have escalated in the country after the police filed terrorism charges against the former Prime Minister of Pakistan in connection with PTI's rally held in Islamabad on August 20, 2022. On August 21, 2022, a first information report (FIR) was registered against the cricketer-turned-politician under the Anti-Terrorism Act for threatening an additional sessions judge and senior police officers at the political power show. At the massive gathering, Imran had said the Islamabad Inspector General of Police and Deputy Inspector General of Police would not be spared. He had further warned Zeba Chaudhry, the additional district and sessions judge, of taking action against her.

But mere statements saying 'have some shame' cannot be presumed as a terror threat. For the term 'terrorism', international law provides no clear definition. It has various political and ideological connotations. However, all the definitions of terrorism so far made across the world are unanimous that criminal acts or acts of violence, not mere statements, fall within the ambit of terrorism. In the US, terrorism is defined in Title 22 Chapter 38, of the US Code as 'premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents'. But no premeditated violence has been reported at the PTI rally in Islamabad.

Likewise, the United Nations Security Council, in its Resolution 1566 of October 2004, elaborates this definition. It says that terrorist acts are 'criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organisation to do or to abstain from doing any act.'

Reaffirming this...