By Rana Malhi
ISLAMABAD
In a new development in the controversial tweets case, human rights lawyer Imaan Zainab Mazari and her husband and lawyer Hadi Ali Chattha, have challenged the non-bailable arrest warrants and the orders terminating their right to defence issued by the trial court before the Islamabad High Court (IHC).
An appeal has been filed in the IHC on behalf of Mazari and Chattha, seeking to have the trial court’s decision of the previous day set aside. The petition requests the suspension of the arrest warrants and restraint on the police from arresting them, and also seeks to declare unlawful the order dated January 15 terminating their right to defence.
A day earlier, Additional District and Sessions Judge Afzal Majoka, while hearing the controversial tweets case, cancelled the bail of Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha and issued non-bailable arrest warrants against them. The court had directed the NCCIA to arrest both accused immediately and send them to judicial lock-up.
According to the court’s written order, a tense situation arose during the hearing when a heated exchange took place between the defence counsel and Prosecutor Muhammad Usman Rana. The court noted that when the prosecutor produced a witness for cross-examination, the accused behaved rudely and even attempted physical interference. As per the judicial record, Hadi Ali Chattha stated that he would neither cross-examine the witnesses himself nor allow anyone else to do so.
The court also rejected Imaan Mazari’s request for exemption from appearance on medical grounds. The judge observed that Imaan Mazari had been absent from several hearings on the pretext of fever, but no authentic medical certificate was submitted with the application. The court held that the accused were deliberately delaying the trial and obstructing the course of a fair hearing.
In the written order, the court stated that due to the conduct of the accused, their right to cross-examine the witnesses had been terminated. It further held that the cross-examination conducted by the state-appointed defence counsel would be treated as final, and the prosecution evidence was declared complete. The investigating officer was directed to arrest the accused and produce them via video link so that their statements under Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code could be recorded.
It may be recalled that last month the Islamabad High Court had directed the trial court to re-record the evidence in the controversial tweets case pending against Iman Zainab Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha. The case was heard by Justice Azam Khan, who remarked that without going into the merits, the court was only directing that the evidence be recorded afresh. The High Court had instructed the trial court to re-record the evidence within three days.
Earlier, during the hearing of the controversial tweets case before the Supreme Court, the apex court had ordered a stay on the trial and directed that the trial court should not proceed further until the decision of the Islamabad High Court.
Background of the case
The case emerged after Imaan Mazari posted certain tweets on the social media platform X, which authorities described as controversial and anti-state. On the basis of these tweets, the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency registered a case against her under PECA. Subsequently, Hadi Ali Chattha was also included in the case on the ground that he had retweeted the same posts.
According to the prosecution, these online posts harmed the credibility of state institutions. However, Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha denied the allegations in court, maintaining that the proceedings were politically motivated.
During the course of the case, charges were framed against both accused, prosecution witnesses were examined, and on several occasions non-bailable arrest warrants were issued due to non-appearance. On one occasion, Hadi Ali Chattha was arrested from outside the court premises, while Imaan Mazari approached the Islamabad High Court through her counsel, declaring the trial to be non-transparent. It was argued that statements of certain witnesses were recorded in the absence of the accused or their lawyers, which violated the principles of a fair trial.
Domestic and international civil society groups also expressed concern over the pace of the proceedings and the manner in which the trial was conducted. Lawyers and human rights organizations stated that the right to defence and a fair hearing must be ensured at all costs, and called for the trial to be conducted transparently, impartially, and strictly in accordance with the law.
It is also pertinent to note that during this period, appeals relating to the transfer of the case were pending before the Islamabad High Court, due to which the district court had adjourned proceedings until December 15.