Forensic analysis deepens legal scrutiny of Pakistani opposition leaders over May 9 unrest
Court seeks identity verification after forensic report filed in May 9 attack case

Kamran Ali
Correspondent Nukta
Kamran Ali, a seasoned journalist from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, has a decade of experience covering terrorism, human rights, politics, economy, climate change, culture, and sports. With an MS in Media Studies, he has worked across print, radio, TV, and digital media, producing investigative reports and co-hosting shows that highlight critical issues.

A forensic investigation into the May 9 attack on Radio Pakistan has increased legal pressure on several Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leaders, including Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi.
The Punjab Forensic Science Agency has submitted its report to an anti-terrorism court, confirming the authenticity of 16 videos linked to the May 9 violence.
According to the report, Afridi, Kamran Bangash, and Taimur Salim Jhagra were identified as being present in the verified footage. The presence of PTI Peshawar President Irfan Salim and others was also confirmed.
Investigators said the videos helped identify multiple suspects already named in related cases.
Court seeks NADRA verification
The court has directed the National Database and Registration Authority to submit an identity verification report at the next hearing.
Sources said the chief minister’s video was not recorded in Peshawar. However, no objections have been filed so far by Afridi or any other PTI leader regarding the footage.
May 9
The attack on the historic Radio Pakistan Peshawar building was one of the most visible episodes in the widespread unrest that erupted on May 9, 2023, after the arrest of former prime minister and PTI founder Imran Khan.
Anti‑terrorism courts across Pakistan have issued non‑bailable warrants and delivered convictions related to the May 9 riots. In some cases, PTI lawmakers and workers have been sentenced to up to 10 years in prison, while others were acquitted due to insufficient evidence.







Comments
See what people are discussing