Mazari and Chattha challenge state-appointed counsel and one-day exemption rulings

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday heard a petition challenging the trial proceedings against lawyer duo Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha in the controversial tweet case. Advocate Ali Azad, representing the couple, argued that the trial court is not conducting a transparent trial, raising concerns over fair trial rights.

During the proceedings, Justice Azam Khan inquired if all lawyers present were representing the case, to which Ali Azad confirmed. The hearing included members of the Islamabad Bar Council, Raja Aleem Abbasi and Zafar Khokhar, as well as numerous legal professionals observing the trial.

Ali Azad stressed that witness statements should be recorded in the presence of the defense, highlighting that cross-examinations of five witnesses had been conducted outside the courtroom, allegedly violating the basic requirements of a fair trial. The counsel further emphasized that a fair trial is a constitutional right and that the trial court had repeatedly overlooked procedural safeguards.

Advocate Zafar Khokhar noted that trials could proceed under a permanent exemption, but not under a one-day exemption, as pleaders assigned for the day must be present. The court asked the lawyers to provide legal backing for the one-day exemption limitation.

The IHC adjourned the case for further hearing, stating that it would review the objections raised before issuing an order.

The case against Mazari and Chattha was registered by the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency, accusing them of posting “anti-state” content on X. The couple has previously raised objections after the state-appointed counsel withdrew from representing them. Chattha was also arrested outside the courtroom in October for failing to appear, despite claims that he arrived early for the proceedings.

“Key Issues and Implications”

1. Fair Trial Concerns: Allegations that witness statements were recorded outside the courtroom raise serious constitutional questions about transparency and due process.
2. Procedural Exemptions: Disputes over one-day versus permanent exemptions highlight ambiguities in trial rules that could impact defense rights.
3. Political and Legal Sensitivity: The case involves accusations of anti-state speech, increasing public and media scrutiny.
4. Bar Council Oversight: Active participation by Islamabad Bar Council members underscores legal community concern over procedural irregularities.