By: Junaid S. Ahmad
When a former prime minister’s reported loss of eyesight triggers an international appeal, the issue is no longer partisan. It is a stark question: why has a detainee allegedly been denied timely specialist medical care, and who is responsible?
More than 40 scholars, public officials, jurists, artists and human-rights activists have issued an open letter expressing grave concern over the reported medical deterioration of Pakistan’s former prime minister, Imran Khan.
Addressed to Pakistani authorities and various global institutions, the February 23, 2026 appeal demands immediate independent medical access and full disclosure of his medical records.
The signatories cite credible reports that Khan has suffered severe vision loss in one eye, allegedly due to delayed ophthalmological treatment while in state custody. If those reports are accurate, the failure is not bureaucratic oversight. It is a direct violation of Pakistan’s constitutional duties and its binding commitments under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. A state that controls every aspect of a prisoner’s movement cannot disclaim responsibility for his medical care.
The coalition’s composition is a who’s who of the world’s most prominent voices for social justice, freedom, and human dignity. Former South African minister Dr. Naledi Pandor joins Rev. Dr. Allan Boesak, Imam Dr. Rashied Omar and anti-apartheid veteran Ronnie Kasrils in endorsing the appeal. Public intellectuals Tariq Ali, Vijay Prashad and Susan Abulhawa stand alongside academics Prof. Steven Friedman, Prof. Norman Finkelstein and Prof. John L. Esposito in stating plainly that withholding or delaying essential medical care in detention is unlawful.
The letter is framed as humanitarian, but its implications are unmistakably legal. It calls for immediate independent specialist treatment, unrestricted access to medical records, humane detention conditions consistent with Pakistani and international law, and strict compliance with court orders. It also recalls the 2024 opinion of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which deemed Khan’s imprisonment arbitrary and called for his release — a finding Pakistani authorities have effectively ignored.
Legal scholars and leading activists — including Prof. Richard Falk, Prof. Ilan Pappé and Prof. Tamara Sonn, along with Medea Benjamin, Craig Mokhiber and Kathy Kelly — warn that prolonged denial of necessary care may constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The risk of irreversible ocular damage is not speculative; it is a foreseeable consequence of delay.
Scholars of Religion and Ethics such as Dr. Yasir Qadhi, Prof. Omid Safi and Dr. Riffat Hassan underscore that detainee rights are not suspended by political rivalry. Elected officials, including Connecticut State Senator Saud Anwar and Pakistan’s ex-Senator Mushtaq Ahmad, lend institutional weight to the demand for transparency.
The appeal places Khan’s condition within a broader pattern of repression. It references the prosecution and detention of activists and lawyers including Mahrang Baloch and Imaan Mazari, and describes a steady contraction of civic space since Khan’s removal in April 2022. Scholars such as Dr. Nader Hashemi, Dr. Assal Rad and Prof. Taimur Rahman argue that the use of anti-terrorism statutes, military trials for civilians and prolonged isolation practices reflects a government willing to weaponize the legal system against dissent.
Support for the letter crosses ideological and geographic lines. Economist Dr. Yanis Varoufakis, Prof. Sami A. Al-Arian, journalist Dr. Yvonne Ridley and media commentator Katie Halper are among the signatories. So are Dr. Ammar Ali Jan, Dr. Chandra Muzaffar, Dr. Ashok Swain and Prof. Junaid Ahmad. Roger Waters adds a cultural voice, signaling that the issue has moved well beyond policy debate.
Additional endorsers — Dr. Fawzia Afzal-Khan, Dr. Sabreena Ghaffar-Siddiqui, Maria Kari, Sabrina Salvati, Motasem Ahmad Dalloul, Dr. Nidal Jboor and Dr. Ranjan Solomon — reinforce that this is not an isolated advocacy effort but a coordinated international demand for compliance with basic legal standards.
Organizers — the Community Alliance for Peace & Justice, the Coalition to Change U.S. Policy on Pakistan (CUSP), and the Center for the Study of Islam & Decolonization — say they are preparing an international humanitarian delegation to seek meetings with Pakistani authorities. The objective is explicit: compel medical transparency and force adherence to minimum human-rights obligations.
The letter’s language is measured; the facts it alleges are not. Court directives reportedly granting access have been disregarded. Independent physicians have been denied entry. If a detainee has indeed suffered preventable, possibly permanent damage while under full state control, responsibility lies squarely with those who exercised that control.
Medical care in custody is not discretionary. It is mandatory. If Pakistani authorities have delayed or obstructed it, they have done so in defiance of their own laws and international commitments. The world is now watching to see whether they correct that failure — or continue to compound it.
SMread: Motive unclear in Tzaneen Mosque attack
Prof. Junaid S. Ahmad teaches Law, Religion, and Global Politics and is the Director of the Center for the Study of Islam and Decolonization (CSID), Islamabad, Pakistan. He is a member of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST), Movement for Liberation from Nakba (MLN), and Saving Humanity and Planet Earth (SHAPE).
Image credit: Images
