ATC sentences Imaan Mazari, Hadi Ali Chattha to 10 years each in barrier removal case

Court hands down sentences under three separate legal provisions, imposes fines on both

ISLAMABAD:

An anti-terrorism court (ATC) on Thursday sentenced human rights lawyers Imaan Mazari and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, to 10 years in prison each in a case involving the removal of security barriers and obstruction of official duties.

The court handed down the sentences under three separate legal provisions and also imposed fines on both defendants. 

On October 27, the trial concluded at Rawalpindi’s Adiala Jail, where both accused recorded their statements under Section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), and the state counsel completed final arguments. ATC framed charges against them on October 7, and the court subsequently recorded statements from all seven prosecution witnesses. The trial was later shifted to Adiala Jail amid disputes over the accused’s production in court and defence lawyers’ access to their clients.

During today's hearing, presided over by ATC Judge Tahir Abbas Sipra, both the defence and prosecution completed their final arguments. Prosecutor Raja Naveed Hussain Kayani concluded his submissions before the court.

Defence counsel Aimal Khan Mandokhail also submitted a written application seeking to defer the verdict until pending petitions before the Supreme Court and the Islamabad High Court (IHC) were decided.

"Until our petitions are heard, the court cannot legally announce its verdict," Mandokhail argued.

He further informed the court that an application seeking the transfer of the case was pending before the IHC.

The court subsequently adjourned proceedings until 1pm, when it is scheduled to announce its verdict.

Earlier this week, Imaan and Hadi approached the Supreme Court against an Islamabad High Court (IHC) decision concerning their request to halt trial proceedings in an anti-terrorism case.

In their petition, the applicants contended that unless the trial was immediately stayed, their pending application before the high court would become ineffective. They argued that the trial court initiated proceedings in haste without granting them adequate time and recorded the statements of prosecution witnesses in a single day.

The petition further maintained that removing security barriers did not constitute terrorism, alleging that the trial was intended to harass the accused and subject them to political victimisation. The applicants claimed that the objective was to keep them behind bars.

Read: State counsel completes cross-examination in Imaan, Hadi security breach case

Earlier this month, the couple had also approached the IHC seeking to suspend the trial, alleging procedural violations in the framing of charges, including that they had not been physically present when indicted and had not received copies of relevant documents.

The IHC heard their appeals and said it would issue an order after hearing the respondents. The court dismissed their request for an interim order on petitions seeking the removal of anti-terrorism provisions from the case. However, it issued notices to the relevant parties on their separate plea seeking suspension of the trial proceedings.

Background

In January, the couple was handed a combined 17-year sentence on multiple charges linked to controversial social media posts that the prosecution argued amounted to an anti-state narrative under cybercrime laws. The same month, they filed applications for suspension of their sentences.

Later, Imaan and her husband Hadi were rearrested on September 17, shortly after the Supreme Court granted them bail and suspended their sentences in the social-media posts case. They were produced before an Islamabad ATC in connection with a case registered at Kohsar Police Station.

Police sought 30-day physical remand, but ATC Judge Abul Hasnat Muhammad Zulqarnain rejected the request and sent the couple on judicial remand. The judge noted that although they had been nominated in the FIR as members of an unlawful assembly, no weapon had been attributed to either accused.