Counsel says witness statements conducted outside courtroom, violating fair trial requirements
Advocate Imaan Mazari. Photo: X
Advocate Ali Azad, representing lawyer duo Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha, has stated that the “trial court is not conducting a transparent trial.” The hearing was of a petition challenging the Trial Court’s order by the couple in the controversial tweet case in the Islamabad High Court on Monday.
The court asked whether all the lawyers present were for this particular case, to which Ali Azad replied affirmatively, stating, “This is a very important case.”
Justice Azam Khan presided over the case with members of the Islamabad Bar Council, Raja Aleem Abbasi and Zafar Khokhar, also in attendance, along with Advocate Ali Azad representing the state. A large number of bar officials and lawyers were present.
The court directed defense counsel Advocate Ali Azad to first review the objections.
Advocate Ali Azad raised concerns that the trial was not proceeding transparently. He said that if there are multiple accused, the trial can continue if one has an exemption.
Ali Azad stressed, “A Fair trial is my constitutional right. Witness statements should be recorded in my presence. The trial court is not conducting a transparent trial. This is one of many cases pending before this court. These are bar members and professional lawyers”.
When the court asked about proceedings on November 24, Hadi Ali Chattha stated that they had filed a request for witness statements to be recorded in their presence, which was rejected.
Read: Imaan Mazari objects to state counsel’s withdrawal from tweets case
Justice Azam Khan asked about the cross-examination of the five witnesses. Ali Azad said it had been conducted outside the courtroom, which violates the basic requirements of a fair trial.
Advocate Zafar Khokhar explained that the trial can continue under a permanent exemption, but not under a one-day exemption, as the pleader is assigned and must be present. Justice Azam Khan asked lawyers to cite the law supporting the one-day exemption limitation.
The lawyers requested the court to halt the trial court proceedings. Justice Azam Khan remarked, “We will review this and issue an order accordingly.”
The court adjourned the case for further hearing.
Read More: Repeated adjournments mar Imaan, Hadi trial proceedings
Mazari and her husband, Chattha, have previously raised objections after their state-appointed counsel 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’ sentiment 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 video footage showed him ‘inside and outside the courtroom’.
After his release, Chattha told reporters that he had arrived five minutes early for the October 29 proceedings, yet the judge had issued an arrest warrant ‘in front of him’.
Ahead of Tuesday’s hearing, Mazari also claimed that the court had ‘forcibly appointed a state counsel for her and Chattha.
