my guest today, former prime minister imran khan, currently facing close to 200 charges which threaten his pti party's ability to mount an electoral challenge. has pakistan's populist political star been outmanoeuvred by the generals who once backed him? imran khan, in lahore, pakistan, welcome to hardtalk. from the outside, mr khan, it looks as though a legal noose is tightening around your neck.

does it feel that way to you? yes, stephen. it's been like that for a while, ever since i was out of power 1a months, 15 months ago. what was hoped by the establishment which removed me, what they hoped was that the party would just fizzle away. and normally it happens — when you're out of power, you're out of power for quite a while. but instead, what happened? the most unusual thing in this country — that the party's popularity kept growing, and that in the by—elections that took place, out of 37 by—elections, my party swept 30 of them. and this is despite the establishment backing the government parties. so since then, attempts are being made to knock me out of the game. i had two assassination attempts on me. and apart from that,

now i have close to my double century — almost 200 cases. and the whole attempt is to either imprison me or disqualify me or both. yeah, you talk about being "knocked out of the game". isn't the reality, now that there are these pretty much 200 cases against you, which include a whole range of charges — the corrupt misuse of official gifts is one, contempt of pakistan's election commission is another, but then there are others which include, as i understand it, sedition, blasphemy, and one case which even alleges your involvement in a murder — it's becoming so complex and so serious that, frankly, you don't have time for anything else? well, you forgot to mention there are about 60—70 terrorism cases against me, so all my time is spent going from one court to another courtroom.

i have made, in two months, over 350 court appearances, and my legal team is busy fending off one case after the other. but the thing is, nothing sticks, because these are frivolous, bogus cases. and what now they are planning to do is to have military courts. and this is right now in the supreme court, whether the courts will allow military courts or not. and the objective of the military court is that, there, i certainly will be sentenced. your contention, i guess, is that you're guilty of absolutely nothing — is that it? absolutely nothing. look, stephen, someone till the age of 70 never had one criminal case against him. in the last few months, how can you have 200 criminal cases? and here's someone who this country knows for 50 years. you know, i'm not someone who this country doesn't know, notjust as a cricketer,

as someone who has done the biggest charitable projects in our history, who people give more money than anyone in our history, so who's trusted with the money. so, people don't believe this. and as a result — according to the opinion polls, rather than the popularity going down, it isjust going further up. i'm sure you're familiar with the notion of karma and the phrase "what goes around comes around". would you accept that one problem for you is that the positions you stake out today are very different from the positions you've taken in the past? and when i say that, i'm thinking, number one, of your enthusiasm for the court's ruling that nawaz sharif, back in the period before 2018, should not be allowed to run again for public office. you, for a couple of years, demanded that he be barred from politics —

in the end, he was. you said the courts had every right to bar a senior politician from running for office — the courts may well be about to bar you from running for office in the forthcoming election — so it's going to be difficult for you to argue the courts have no right to do that. there's a word, or two words — moral equivalence. it's when you equate two completely unrelated instances and combine them and sort of draw an analogy. look, nawaz sharif, how did he get caught? it was in panama papers, that expose that took place, where it was discovered that he had four luxury flats in london which he had not declared and were in his daughter's name. there was one—and—a—half years in court, there was a joint investigating committee which asked him to provide, "where did he get the money to buy these four flats?"

when he couldn't, that's when he was disqualified. it cannot be compared with me, where, out of almost 200, there are only two corruption cases. and both i'm fighting. and i'm telling you that both the cases, they will never find anything because there was no corruption. you can't compare him — four luxury flats, worth millions of dollars, in london, he gets convicted, he gets to serve a sentence — to compare to what is going on right now. would you accept that you've made several grave errors in the recent past? perhaps one of your most serious errors was fomenting an atmosphere after you were ousted from power last year, an atmosphere in which you encouraged hostility toward the military. and when you were arrested in may of this year, your supporters immediately

took to the streets in violent protest, which included violence directed against military targets, including the house of one senior general. they were your people responding to your rhetoric. well, stephen, let mejust answer this one by one. number one, in my 27 years in politics, never have i told anyone ever to be violent. all our protests have been within the constitution, peaceful protest, which is allowed... when we feel any injustice, it is a right to have a protest, and that's what we've done. we did the longest—ever protest of 126 days, and not one act of violence ever took place. they were peaceful protests. we used to protest and go back. so, first, let me make it clear, and this is what the courts have discovered.

when they tried to accuse us, when the government accused us of attacking army buildings, the courts — two judgements now — have cleared us, that none of us were involved in any violence. we believe that there should be independent investigation into just the four places where the violence took place. but hang on, did you not think for a moment — knowing pakistan as you do, the polarised feelings amongst your people, did you not think for a moment it was irresponsible of you, in the months running up to may 9th of this year, to be accusing the military of essentially running a puppet government, of launching a coup d'etat, of taking over pakistan and completely undermining its democracy? did you not for a moment think that that might lead to trouble? so, stephen, what you're saying is that i should not tell what was the truth? everyone in pakistan knows what happened. the defence minister,

the current sitting defence minister — you know, who was in the opposition — he has given a public statement that way back in 2020... i mean, we went six months down the line in our government. he said that the then current army chief told him categorically that he wanted to get rid of my government — and had it not been for two years of covid—i9, which is why he held back, that's the only reason he didn't remove oui’ government. now, this is from the current defence minister, so no—one in this country is in any doubt that it was the ex—army chief who removed my government. in fact, he has bragged. he said he thought imran khan was dangerous for pakistan. that's why he removed me. so this isjust a fact — no—one. well, i talked about karma. yeah, i talked about karma before. the truth is, you rode the tiger of military support for their political candidate.

you rode that tiger yourself in 2018. you were close to the military. you remained close to the intelligence services and the military in your early years in power. and it was only when you fell out with the military that you decided you wanted no military meddling in politics. again, it's hypocrisy. one of the army spokespeople said, "imran khan is the biggest hypocrite." so, stephen, i need to correct you again. my party is the only party that was not created by military dictators. people's party... ayub khan, the first dictator, zulfikar ali bhutto was his minister for eight years before he left his government and then created the party. nawaz sharif was manufactured by general zia—ul—haq. he was a businessman. my party started from zero.

22 years, i built my party from scratch. and then, if in 2018, the army backed us, then how come, then despite the establishment openly going against us, trying to dismantle us, how come, after we are out of government, we win 30 out of 37 by—elections? how come that has hap...? because the establishment, everyone knows, is standing with the government. so how can we sweep all the by—elections? so, clearly, we did not come into power because of the army. where you're right, the army did not oppose me in 2018. that's where you're right. but in 2013, the military establishment backed nawaz sharif, brought him into power. that's why we did this protest for 126 days, because we wanted the audit of the elections because we knew the elections were rigged. when in �*18 we came into power, we asked them to open

the elections because we knew we had won free and fair elections. isn't the truth, though, that you believed, after you lost that vote of confidence in 2022, you believed you could use people power to force the army to come back to you, in essence, and you were wrong? and going back to what happened in may 2023, when your supporters went to the streets, they committed that violence, including against key military infrastructure. you basically crossed a red line, a red line that even supporters of your own pti party, even former friends and colleagues in your government say is on you. it's your responsibility. to quote your former defence minister pervez khattak, he says, "all of the political representatives of my new party "hold imran khan responsible for the tragedy of may ninth."

he said, "imran khan's anti—state agenda has been "rejected by the masses and his own party's former leadership." now, stephen, let me answer this question, because it's very important — what happened on the 9th of may? 0n the 9th of may, i'm sitting in the presence of the islamabad high court. i'm on bail of these many cases, so there was no case on me. i get attacked by the commandos — not by police, by commandos. there are visuals which have gone all over the world. i was attacked. my people — guards were beaten up, and i was abducted from there, confirmed by the supreme court, unlawful and unconstitutional. so what did you think the supporters would do? when they saw the army,

the commandos picking me up from there, was there not going to be a protest? but remember when i was shot? when i was shot and 12 of my other people were wounded, one dead, despite that, there was no burning, there was no arson. there were peaceful protests, but there were protests without any arson. so how come — this is the big question — when they see me being dragged — like, the head of the biggest party — abducted, there was going to be a reaction. my point is, were we involved in the arson? arson only took place in four buildings. they put 10,000 of our workers injail. now, stephen, you've got to listen to this. this is very important. this was all pre—planned. police could have picked me up. why did they need commandos to pick me up and beat everyone up? because they wanted a reaction. and there was, but the reaction was peaceful, as it's always been.

i want to stop you, imran khan, because you have made it clear you accept no responsibility for the violence around may 9th. i understand that, but my point, really, was to focus on the fact that since may 9th, the extreme pressure put on your pti party, some of its members from the most senior to the mostjunior, has led to the implosion of your party. some of your most senior former lieutenants like fawad chaudhry, pervez khattak — whom i mentioned — jahangir tareen, they've all left. some of them have set up new political parties. your party, as it was, frankly no longer exists. if my party doesn't exist, why don't they announce elections? why did they run away from the elections stipulated by the constitution, announced by the supreme court on the 9th of may, and 60% of pakistan was punjab? they ran away

from the elections. now they're trying to run away from the elections in october. so if my party is finished, they shouldn't be worried. the problem is the party's intact. they have tried everything. they have put 10,000 people injail, including women — never done before — peaceful protesters, and worse, they have put people through torture. we have faced custodial torture. it's never happened in the history of this country. and under pressure, some people have left, but the vast majority of people are in hiding today in pakistan. all my senior leadership which is not arrested, a few of them have defected. the rest are in hiding — my workers are in hiding. i am the only one with 1—2 other guys who are not in hiding, but we are more or less house arrested. but that's the point, that's the point. hang on, he don't have much time, let's get some brief questions and answers. fawad chaudhry, who we've had

on this show, who was very loyal to you, but now has quit politics, saying he can't work with you any more — he said the other day, he said you, imran khan, have to find a way to build bridges to the mainstream politicians. and he even mentioned nawaz sharif, he said the country is on the brink of a terrible crisis, and it's incumbent upon you to put your own interests aside and reach out to nawaz sharif and others. are you prepared to do that? the fact that the country is on the brink of a major disaster is true. we really are heading — what i feel are the dark ages because we basically have an undeclared martial law in pakistan. i mean, the country evolved towards a democratic process over the last 20 years and, suddenly, there's no media which is free, and thejudiciary, they're trying to control that, so we're heading in the dark ages. but what is the answer? is the answer to shake hands with people who've been robbing

this country for 30 years? i came into politics because the two families had destroyed our country economically. i came in because i wanted to bring the powerful under the rule of law, which is why my party was called movement forjustice — rule of law. and now, am i supposed to join the same people who are responsible for destroying the rule of law in this country, who are above law, so that iagain... what for, to come into power? i'd rather not come into power. i'd rather stay in the opposition. what's the point of coming into power if you can't bring justice here? right, but let's stick with the idea that pakistan faces a catastrophic future if political instability feeds into security instability and we see that the suicide bombings, the terror continues — particularly aimed at political parties right now — and also we see a potential economic catastrophe with an imf bailout,

which just stopped the country defaulting, but which nonetheless leaves pakistan in a parlous position. your country can't afford the political chaos that will come if you try to run in the forthcoming election. itjust can't afford it. stephen, look, the only solution to pakistan — and any sensible person in this country will confirm this — the only solution, there is no other solution, free and fair elections. that's the only way we will get out of this mess. what is happening is that in order to keep me out, they are dismantling our democracy. and what you're seeing in the rise in terrorism, the whole province of kp, pakhtunkhwa, which is on the border of afghanistan, why was there no terrorism when we were in power for three—and—a—half years? why is it suddenly that terrorism is going up? because they are no

longer represented. in pakhtunkhwa, where the terrorism has started, and in balochistan, there has been a caretaker government which is not representative of pakistan, doesn't belong to the people, and that's going there for eight months. it's illegal, it's unconstitutional. so the answer is free and fair elections. let the people select their own representatives and then let them sort out the problems of pakistan. we, as a representative government, had brought down terrorism in pakistan. you, right now, are sitting in lahore. every time you try to leave your home, you have to negotiate all of the armed guards and the security that surrounds you. pretty much your only journeys right now are to the courthouse. you know that you survived an assassination attempt last november, but you've said you expect another one to come. i believe your own children have told you that you ought to get out of politics for your own safety. why will you not heed that advice?

because it may be the only way to calm tensions in your country. stephen, what you're saying is that we should accept slavery and not have freedom. democracy means freedom. so what you're basically telling me is that in order to accept this fascist government, which is destroying our civil liberties by the day... they're about to pass a bill — just so that you know what we are facing right now — they are passing a bill which is called prevention of extreme violence. the intelligence agencies can break into anyone's house without an arrest warrant. they can pick anyone up. they can try people in military courts without access to justice. this is what we are facing now. unfortunately, the country has been taken over by fascists and they are petrified of elections. the reason why i'm suffering is because they know that

elections — we would win hands down. and because of that, they're not only dismantling our democracy, it means we should accept that we don't have any freedom. how can we accept that? how can anyone accept that? you've made a series of allegations about this government — which, of course, the current pakistani government would absolutely deny — but what is clear is that if elections are to be held this year, you have a choice. you either try to run or you back off because it could send pakistan over the edge. what are you going to do? what will save pakistan are free and fair elections. stephen, make no mistake about it, because that will give it political stability, a government backed by a public mandate. if it comes in for five years, will give us political stability and that will then give us economic stability. at the moment, there is no political stability and

the economy has just tanked. and this terrorism is an offshoot. when there's no representation of people, when they are being ruled by a centre which has no idea how to deal with things as things deteriorate, so, look, what you're basically saying is that i should just leave these guys alone and, you know, look after myself. so it's easy for me. all i have to say is that, "look, i'm going for a holiday to london to see my boys," and life is easy for me. but look, i mean, iam the first generation of pakistanis which grew in an independent country. my parents grew up in colonial india. so we value our freedom. imran khan, we have to end there. thanks very much for joining me on hardtalk.

hello there. wednesday's weather did not look or feel particularly summer—like across large swathes of the uk, thanks to an area of low pressure, this swirl of cloud on the satellite picture. this was named storm patricia by the french weather service because of impacts it had in france, but particularly on the southern flank of that storm system, we've had some very strong winds. there have been some really heavy downpours, but that area of low pressure is now rolling away eastwards. in its wake, though, we're going to be left with a brisk northerly wind, which will make it feel decidedly cool over the next couple of days. that cool breeze a big feature of thursday's weather, a mix of sunny spells and showers. some quite large areas of cloud, particularly across northern parts of scotland, where we will see some bits and pieces of rain. but for southern scotland, northern ireland, england

and wales, it's a mixed bag — some spells of sunshine, some showers, some of which will be heavy and thundery. but there will be places that avoid the showers and stayjust about dry. temperatures ranging from 1a celsius in stornoway, to 22 in london. and then as we head through thursday night, we will continue to see some of these showers. some clear spells here and there. i think out west, it will be mostly dry by the end of the night. temperatures typically holding up at between 11—14 celsius. so we head into friday, still feeling the effects of that northerly breeze. some spells of sunshine, some showers too. this time, those showers mostly across central and eastern parts of england. the odd heavy thundery one. elsewhere, more in the way of dry weather, although we will see cloud filling the sky across northern ireland later in the day ahead of this next weather system. and temperatures 16—20 celsius at best. and then, let me show you what happens on saturday, because this area of low pressure is going to push its way in from the atlantic, the fourth weekend in a row dominated by low pressure. this one quite a deep affair.

a bout of heavy rain, could well be some thunder and some lightning mixing in. northern scotland likely to avoid it, but some wet weather elsewhere and the potential for gales, particularly around some western coasts. and with the cloud, the rain, the strength of the wind, temperatures really will struggle —14—18 celsius. we would expect temperatures higher than that at this point in early august. but as we look further ahead into the middle part of next week, there are some signs that things could turn a bit drier and warmer.

live from london — this is bbc news. donald trump is due in court later after being indicted for his alleged attempts to subvert the 2020 election. we have a special report from a town in northern india, which has been hit by religious violence. and it's the last group stage matches at the women's world cup, with all teams in the group still able to clinch a spot in the last 16. and walking the tight rope — bank of england repairs to rates for the 14th time. can it rein in inflation without

strangling the economy? hello, i'm sally bundock. a very warm welcome to the programme. former us president donald trump is preparing to appear in a court later today to face four counts of plotting to overturn the presidential result of 2020. the 45—page indictment, or charge sheet, accuses him of knowingly spreading "pervasive and destabilising lies" about election fraud that threatened american democracy. mr trump's campaign has likened the allegations to the persecution inflicted in nazi germany. the former president has now been impeached twice, arrested twice and charged in three criminal cases. live now to washington, and let's speak to our correspondent sean dilley. hello, sean. all eyes on the

courtroom today. i know it's