IHC bench hearing appeals of Imaan Mazari, Hadi Chatha dissolved

ISLAMABAD: The bench of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) hearing the appeals of human rights lawyer Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and her husband, advocate Hadi Ali Chatha, has been dissolved, and the case file has been sent to the Chief Justice of the IHC, Justice Muhammad Asif announced on Monday.

The dissolution follows an earlier order noting that Justice Azam Khan had been hearing similar cases. Mazari and Chatha had filed a request for an early hearing of their appeals, which will now be considered by the Chief Justice.

BACKGROUND

The couple was convicted in January by a district and sessions court in Islamabad over social media posts on X (formerly Twitter), which were deemed to “promote narratives aligned with hostile terrorist groups and proscribed organisations” and undermine trust in state institutions.

They were sentenced to a total of 17 years in prison under Sections 9 (glorification of an offence), 10 (cyberterrorism), and 26-A (false and fake information) of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), with fines amounting to millions of rupees.

Under the judgment, both were sentenced to five years under Section 9, 10 years under Section 10, and two years under Section 26-A, with sentences running concurrently. Time already spent in detention was to be counted toward their terms.

The couple has been attending proceedings via video link from Adiala Jail, where they were in judicial remand in a separate case. During the verdict hearing, they boycotted the proceedings, raising allegations of mistreatment and procedural violations.

Their legal team, including advocates Zainab Janjua, Asif Irfan, barristers Ahsan Jamal Pirzada and Qasim Nawaz Abbasi, Chhachh Muhammad Ashraf Gujar, Chaudhry Naeem Ali Gujar, Faisal Siddiqi, Riyasat Ali Azad, and Syed Wajid Ali Shah Gilani, has repeatedly highlighted restrictions imposed on the couple, including solitary confinement and limited access to lawyers and family, despite High Court orders.

The convictions sparked criticism from civil society and bar associations, with concerns raised over free speech and due process. Protests and lawyer strikes followed, while rights groups described the application of PECA in the case as heavy-handed.