Islamabad Traffic Plan for SCO Summit

Monitoring Desk: Matrix is a barristers’ chambers in London a group of independent and specialist lawyers who work across a wide range of areas of law, indicates that Imran Khan, former Prime Minister of Pakistan and leader of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party is not fit to contest the race for Chancellor of the University of Oxford.

The Matrix document available with DND News Agency indicates that regulation 7(d) of Oxford’s Council Regulations must be reviewed while dealing with the candidacy of Imran Khan through the lens of Oxford’s governing regulations. Regulation 7(d) of the Council Regulations 8 of 2002 outlines the eligibility criteria for individuals holding roles as trustees of the university, including the Chancellor. These criteria emphasize personal integrity, compliance with legal standards, and the fitness of candidates to serve as representatives of the university.

The document says that Imran Khan’s criminal conviction in the Tosha Khana case, in which he was found guilty of profiting from state gifts while in office, presents a significant barrier to his candidacy. Section 178 of the Charities Act 2011 explicitly disqualifies individuals with criminal convictions from holding trustee roles in registered charities, a category under which Oxford falls. King’s Counsel Hugh Southey’s legal opinion reinforces this, asserting that Khan’s conviction likely renders him ineligible under UK charity law.

Moreover, the clause “Fit and Proper Person” Test and HMRC Guidelines also bars Khan from contesting the election. The “fit and proper person” test, as defined by HMRC, plays a critical role in determining the suitability of candidates for positions of influence in charitable organizations. This test assesses whether individuals can be trusted to manage charity resources responsibly and act in the best interests of the institution.

Khan’s criminal record, alongside his continued involvement in politically divisive activities, raises concerns about his ability to meet these standards. The question of Khan’s fitness for office is not merely legal; it speaks to the broader issue of whether his leadership would align with Oxford’s values of transparency, integrity, and intellectual freedom. These legal and moral hurdles cast doubt on the feasibility of his candidacy, particularly given the high ethical standards Oxford maintains.