Judge orders arrest and revokes cross-examination rights for repeated failures to appear
Human rights lawyer and social activist Imaan Mazari and her husband Hadi Ali Chattha. Photo archive
ISLAMABAD:
An Islamabad district court on Thursday canceled the bail of lawyer and activist Imaan Mazar and her husband Hadi Ali Chattha in a case related to controversial social media posts, citing repeated failures to appear and heated scenes during the proceedings.
In view of the circumstances, the court revoked the bail granted earlier to the two, ordered their arrest and production before the court and formally withdrew their right to cross-examination.
The case has been registered under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 (PECA). Prosecutors have accused Mazari and Chattha of inciting divisions along linguistic lines through social media posts and creating the impression that state institutions were involved in terrorism within the country.
The hearing was conducted by Judge Afzal Majoka, who expressed his displeasure after both accused again failed to appear in court. Prosecutor Rana Usman opposed any further postponement.
During the trial, the court warned that continued absence could result in the loss of a fundamental right of defense. “Inform the accused that if he does not appear today, his right to cross-examination will be terminated,” Judge Majoka said.
Read: IHC orders re-recording of witness statements in Imaan and Hadi tweets case
Cross-examination allows the accused to question prosecution witnesses to check the credibility and reliability of their testimony. Under Pakistani criminal procedure, denying this right is considered an exceptional measure, usually taken when courts consider delays to be deliberate.
Earlier, the defense attorney argued that Mazari wanted to conduct the cross-examination herself, citing her legal background and health problems. “You want to ask the witness some questions,” Hadi Ali Chattha had told the court.
Judge Majoka issued a firm warning at the time: “Complete the cross-examination of the witness, otherwise I will close this right.”
Tensions rose when Islamabad District Bar Association president Naeem Gujar appeared in court and exchanged harsh words with the prosecution over the conduct of the trial and insistence on immediate testimony. The exchange caused the judge to briefly leave the courtroom, after which the proceedings were halted.
The court canceled the interim bail of both accused and ordered authorities to arrest them and produce them before the court. He also ordered that at the next hearing the statements provided for in Article 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code be recorded, which allows the accused to explain the evidence against them.
The case has been adjourned until tomorrow.
Case history
The case against Mazari, a lawyer and human rights activist, and Chattha centers on alleged controversial posts and reposts on X, formerly Twitter, which authorities have described as “anti-state.” The National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency registered the case under PECA 2016, saying the content was aimed at inciting divisions and negatively portraying state institutions.
Early in the proceedings, the trial court issued no-bail warrants after the defendants failed to appear, drawing criticism and legal challenges from the defense. Mazari and Chattha subsequently approached the Islamabad High Court, alleging lack of transparency and procedural irregularities, including the collection of evidence in their absence and without adequate legal representation.
His request for transfer of the case was heard by the high court, which refused to grant an immediate stay. The couple then filed a petition with the Supreme Court, which ordered a temporary stay of the trial until the high court completes its hearing.
The Islamabad Bar Association and other legal bodies have criticized aspects of the trial, arguing that the accused’s right to a fair defense has been undermined. The proceedings have been subject to multiple postponements and continued litigation in higher courts over due process and defense rights.
