Lawyer says witness statements were made outside the courtroom, violating fair trial requirements
Lawyer Imaan Mazari. Photo:
Lawyer Ali Azad, representing law duo Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha, has stated that “the trial court is not conducting a transparent trial.” The hearing was on a petition challenging the couple’s Trial Court order in the controversial tweets case in the Islamabad High Court on Monday.
The court asked if all the lawyers present were for this particular case, to which Ali Azad responded in the affirmative, stating: “This is a very important case.”
Justice Azam Khan presided over the case and Islamabad Bar Council members Raja Aleem Abbasi and Zafar Khokhar, along with lawyer Ali Azad representing the state, also attended. A large number of civil servants and barristers were present.
The court ordered defense lawyer Ali Azad to first review the objections.
Lawyer Ali Azad expressed concern that the trial was not being conducted in a transparent manner. He said that if there are several defendants, the trial can continue if one has an exemption.
Ali Azad stressed: “A fair trial is my constitutional right. Witness statements must be recorded in my presence. The trial court is not conducting a transparent trial. This is one of the many cases pending before this court. These are professional lawyers and members of the bar.”
When the court inquired about the process on November 24, Hadi Ali Chattha stated that they had submitted a request to have the witness statements recorded in their presence, which was rejected.
Read: Imaan Mazari opposes the withdrawal of the state prosecutor from the tweets case
Justice Azam Khan asked about the cross-examination of the five witnesses. Ali Azad said it had been carried out outside the courtroom, violating the basic requirements of a fair trial.
Lawyer Zafar Khokhar explained that the trial can continue with a permanent exemption, but not with a one-day exemption, as the lawyer is assigned and must be present. Justice Azam Khan asked the lawyers to cite the law supporting the limitation of the one-day exemption.
The lawyers asked the court to stop the first instance process. Justice Azam Khan commented: “We will review this and make an order accordingly.”
The court adjourned the case for further hearing.
Read more: Repeated postponements harm Imaan and Hadi’s court proceedings
Mazari and her husband, Chattha, had already raised objections after the state-appointed lawyer withdrew from the controversial case.
The National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency has registered a case against Mazari and Chattha; both are accused of posting “anti-state” sentiments on X. The couple was formally charged on October 30, a day after Chattha was arrested outside the courtroom for failing to appear. Mazari maintained that a video showed him “in and outside the courtroom.”
After his release, Chattha told reporters that he had arrived five minutes early for the Oct. 29 proceeding, but that the judge had issued an arrest warrant “in front of him.”
Before Tuesday’s hearing, Mazari also claimed that the court had “forcibly appointed a state attorney for her and Chattha.”
