December 5, 2025
By Rana Malhi
ISLAMABAD
On Friday, the Islamabad District and Sessions Court held a hearing in the controversial tweets case, against Advocates Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chatha. The proceedings were presided over by the Additional Sessions Judge, Justice Afzal Majoka at the preliminary stage. Mazari marked the beginning of the proceedings by addressing the judge at the start of the proceedings, saying that if a seven-year sentence was to be handed down, she was prepared to accept it. The judge did not respond to this remark and instructed the prosecutor to present the final arguments.
During the initial proceedings, Judge Afzal Majoka told the prosecutor to schedule the hearing for 9:15 a.m. When the prosecutor sought clarification on the timing, the judge reiterated that proceedings should follow the court’s schedule. Meanwhile, a new application was filed by lawyer Hadi Ali Chatha, requesting permission to present witnesses in defense and to record the 342 statement. The court issued a notice to the prosecutor regarding the application and adjourned the hearing until 10 a.m.
When the hearing resumed at 10 a.m., Additional Sessions Judge Afzal Majoka began the final stage of the proceedings. The courtroom was attended by the prosecutor from NCCIA, advocates Iman Mazari and Hadi Ali Chatha, Islamabad Bar President Naeem Ali Gujar, and Bar member Raja Aleem Abbasi. Heavy police presence was maintained inside and outside the courtroom, including female police officers.
Hadi Ali Chatha began presenting arguments regarding the 342 statement, emphasizing that it constitutes the defendant’s official statement and without its recording, the defendant’s right to a complete defense would be compromised. He added that he had been given 33 questions the previous day and had requested additional time on several occasions, but the court had not made an immediate decision. Chatha further requested that multiple lawyers and journalists be summoned as witnesses, including Afra Siab Khatak, Akhtar Mengal, Mustafa Nawaz Khokhar, Hamid Mir, Arifa Noor, Jibran Nasir, Rima Umar, Amna Masood Janjua, and Ayesha Masood Janjua.
During the arguments, Islamabad Bar member Raja Aleem Abbasi remarked that in his 34 years of practice, he had never seen a 342 statement recorded without consulting the defendant. He urged the court to uphold principles of justice and to take the defendant’s response before delivering a decision. Bar President Naeem Gujar also requested the court to maintain order in the courtroom and prevent slogans or disruptions by lawyers.
The prosecutor then began presenting final arguments, noting that no request for additional time for the 342 statement had been made the previous day. He also stated that the transfer request to another court had not been noticed. Lawyers insisted that the court first decide on the application before hearing final arguments.
Tensions escalated in the courtroom as lawyers began chanting slogans. The Bar President instructed them to maintain decorum, after which the state counsel submitted written arguments.
Subsequently, Advocates Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chatha filed a petition expressing no confidence in Judge Afzal Majoka and requesting the case be transferred to the Islamabad High Court. The court adjourned the hearing until Monday for further proceedings.
After the hearing, Hadi Ali Chatha told the media that discussions on the 342 application highlighted that the prosecutor and special prosecutor were unable to present complete evidence. He stated that the questions had been provided to him at 10 a.m., allowing only four hours for responses, insufficient for a full defense. He added that he had requested 18 witnesses, but the court had yet to decide on this matter.
Senior lawyer and former Islamabad Bar President Zahid Mahmood Raja said that courts must follow the law and cannot issue final decisions while applications are pending. He noted that the court appeared to rush the decision, drawing strong criticism.
Digital rights activist Fareiha Aziz said that basic legal procedures were not being followed in the case and defendants were being denied the opportunity for a proper defense. She added that recent amendments to the law had made such cases more complex and difficult for the public.
Senior journalist Matiullah Jan observed that a large number of lawyers, organization representatives, and senior advocates were present in court. He said the defendants’ position regarding the 342 statement had been overlooked and that the case transfer request had been filed, leading to the adjournment until Monday. He added that proceedings in the Islamabad High Court and the Supreme Court would continue.
During the proceedings, Advocates Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chatha expressed no confidence in the judge and filed a request to transfer the case, which is now pending before the Islamabad High Court. Under the law, the Additional Sessions Judge will not be able to issue any decision until the High Court delivers its ruling, and the hearing is adjourned until Monday.
Condemnation by civil society activists
An independent collective of civil society, including lawyers, journalists and academics have strongly condemned the denial of fair trial and due process to Advocates Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and Hadi Ali Chattha in the ongoing criminal proceedings against them under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act for “cyber terrorism”, “hate speech” and “false and fake information”.
A letter signed by hundreds, said that the trial of the two lawyers, has been marred by ‘procedural irregularities and apparent judicial bias’. The letter said that Justice Muhammad Afzal Majoka framed charges in the absence of both counsels and their defence team, recorded the Examination-in-Chief on 19-11-2025 without affording legal representation, refused to hear arguments on 29-11-2025 despite the filing of a lawful application for acquittal and forcefully expelled both advocates from the courtroom before proceeding with cross-examination of state witnesses through a government-appointed counsel.
In consecutive hearings requests for additional time to prepare a defence were denied, while applications to remove state-appointed counsel were dismissed without proper consideration. Most recently, state appointed counsel recorded a statement under Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which gives accused the opportunity to explain any evidence against them, without consulting Advocates Imaan and Hadi.
All these actions constitute blatant violations of fundamental rights, fair trial and due process and contravene Pakistan’s obligations under the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.
According to Principle 16, governments must “ensure that lawyers (a) are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference; (…) and (c) shall not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognised professional duties, standards and ethics.” Principle 23 affirms that “lawyers, like other citizens, are entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly,” and that they “shall have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights.” Finally, Principle 18 emphasises that “lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions.”
In light of the aforementioned, civil society has urged that Pakistani authorities to immediately drop all charges and end criminal proceedings against Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and Hadi Ali Chattha related to their legitimate professional activities and exercise of freedom of expression; and to immediately cease all acts of harassment, intimidation, and improper interference in their legitimate professional work. They have also said that the authorities must ensure that all lawyers in Pakistan can perform their professional duties without fear of reprisals, and free of all undue restrictions, in accordance with international standards.
Prominent lawyers and advocates including Abid Hasan Minto, Salahuddin Ahmed, Ahmad Rafay Alam, Sarah Belal, Nida Usman Chaudhry, Iftikharuddin Riaz, Salman Akram Raja, and many others from across the country, signed the document.
There were also journalists, political workers and activists.