December 11, 2025
By Rana Malhi
Islamabad
The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered the suspension of trial court proceedings in the controversial tweets case against Advocate Imaan Mazari and Advocate Hadi Ali, directing that the trial must remain paused until the Islamabad High Court (IHC) decides the appeal pending before it.
A three-member bench heard Advocate Mazari’s petition seeking a halt to the trial. The Court observed that because the matter is already fixed before the Islamabad High Court, the trial court should not continue proceedings in parallel.
The judges noted that the Islamabad High Court is scheduled to hear the appeal on December 16. “Until the Islamabad High Court decides the appeal, the trial court shall not proceed,” the Supreme Court ordered. The bench further expressed the expectation that the High Court would decide the matter promptly.
Earlier, counsel for the petitioners, Advocate Faisal Siddiqi, argued that the case had become more complex after the introduction of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) 2016. He maintained that the trial court proceedings contained significant irregularities which necessitated interim protection.
Siddiqi informed the Court that they had already told the Islamabad High Court that if relief was not granted there, the trial court proceedings would continue, making a stay from the Supreme Court essential.
The Additional Attorney General opposed the maintainability of the appeals, arguing that such petitions were not generally heard by the Supreme Court.
Justice Hashim Kakar questioned his stance and said the petitioners’ counsel must be allowed to complete his arguments.
When the Additional Attorney General continued to press the point about maintainability, Siddiqi replied, “I am not mute,” prompting Justice Kakar to state that government counsel would be heard after the petitioners had concluded.
During the hearing, Siddiqi cited previous judgments authored by Justice Hashim Kakar and Justice Salahuddin Panhwar. Justice Kakar asked whether there was any reason for repeatedly referring to his decisions. Siddiqi responded that the judgments were relevant to the legal issues at hand.
Justice Kakar remarked that the case had been widely debated on social media. He questioned whether any provision under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act permitted trial proceedings without the presence of counsel. Siddiqi replied that PECA contained no such clause, but relevant provisions of the criminal code applied. He added that under Section 342, question forms are issued to the accused, and in this case the state counsel suggested that written arguments would suffice.
The bench also commented on the conduct of the accused. Justice Kakar said that although Advocate Mazari and Advocate Hadi Ali were both lawyers, their behaviour during trial proceedings had “not been very good,” noting that they had participated in protests during hearings.
He said no judge of the subordinate judiciary should be disrespected. “We will not allow trial court judges to be dishonoured,” Justice Kakar remarked. At the same time, he added that the government could also not be allowed unchecked authority to punish as it wished.
He further observed that complications in the case had arisen on both sides. Justice Kakar added that while judges eventually move on from their positions, the dignity of the courts must remain intact.
The Additional Attorney General then reiterated his objection, stating that the appeals were not maintainable before the Supreme Court. Justice Kakar responded, “Do not restrict speech here. If you do not let them speak here, they will go and speak elsewhere.”
He asked whether the government had any objection to the Islamabad High Court deciding the appeal. The Additional Attorney General said the government had none. Justice Kakar added, “What will be achieved if Imaan Mazari is hanged a day earlier?”
After hearing arguments from all sides, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeals filed by Advocate Mazari and Advocate Hadi Ali and ordered that the trial must remain suspended until the Islamabad High Court delivers its decision.
Speaking to the media after the hearing, their counsel, Advocate Riyasat Ali Azad, said they had filed a criminal petition for leave to appeal against the order previously challenged before the Islamabad High Court.
He said they had also requested suspension of the trial court’s order due to “many gross mistakes” in the proceedings.
Advocate Hadi Ali said the Supreme Court’s decision represented a victory for law. He said the matter involved a simple legal provision and that they had earlier asked the trial court to proceed with the trial in their presence.
Human rights activist Tahira Abdullah said she felt relief after the Court’s decision, describing it as offering hope for justice. Another rights activist, Amina Masood Janjua, said the case amounted to “the burial of justice,” and welcomed the Supreme Court’s stay order, calling it a positive signal.
It is worth noting that the district court had already adjourned proceedings until December 15, as the transfer appeals were pending before the Islamabad High Court