Tense scenes in court during hearing of Imaan Mazari’s and Hadi Chattha case

ISLAMABAD: A dramatic hearing unfolded on Tuesday in the controversial social media tweets case against human rights lawyer Imaan Mazari and her husband, advocate Hadi Ali Chattha, with fiery exchanges in court and ongoing legal wrangling over evidence and procedure.

Additional District and Sessions Judge Afzal Majoka presided over the latest session, during which defence and prosecution repeatedly sparred over witness testimony and documentary evidence.

During proceedings, defence counsel for Hadi Ali Chattha completed cross-examination of prosecution witness NCCIA official Afzal, who told the court he could not produce a copy of his contract or service card at that moment. The witness said he personally signs to receive mail and did not have service documentation available. Chattha questioned missing timestamps on letters received on 16 and 20 October 2025, and noted inconsistencies between witness and signatory signatures.

Judge Majoka instructed that once both defendants have completed cross-examination of a witness, only then can another witness be examined.

Imaan Mazari — whose lawyer was absent at the time — adopted the questioning of witness Afzal already conducted by Chattha on her behalf. She also formally recorded her protest that her counsel was not permitted to cross-examine the witness. The judge noted this objection in court records.

Prosecution then brought forward NCCIA witness Wasim, who testified that he has been a contract employee with the FIA for five years and worked with NCCIA since its inception. He acknowledged appearing in religious offence cases as a witness and confirmed he has no service card for NCCIA but holds an FIA card.

Wasim said that official documents submitted in evidence were signed by him and that he conducts investigations, inquiries and, where necessary, FIRs for offences that do not require a notice.

Next, technical expert Anis-ur-Rehman testified that he received a scope letter identifying Twitter accounts for analysis and prepared more than 5,200 technical reports in his career.

He explained his findings were based on seven screenshots and 14 tweets, some of which were posted in 2021. He said the scope letter directed him to prepare the report against Mazari and Chattha for allegedly posting what the agency considered an “anti-state narrative.” Defence counsel challenged the basis for labeling the tweets as anti-state and noted that neither PTM nor other banned groups were mentioned in the screenshots.

During the hearing, tensions escalated sharply between the prosecution and defence teams, including an attempted physical confrontation inside the courtroom.

The heated exchange of words took place between the prosecution and Hadi Ali Chattha. The situation escalated after the prosecution used inappropriate and offensive language while addressing Chattha, triggering unrest in the courtroom.

The verbal clash soon led to an attempt at physical confrontation between the prosecution team and defence lawyers inside the court premises. Police personnel were called in to intervene and separate the parties, preventing the situation from worsening.

Judge Majoka admonished the prosecution for its conduct and directed an apology for inappropriate language used during arguments.

The prosecution later issued a formal apology after the court’s recess. The technical witness further acknowledged that 70 additional Twitter handles retweeted posts linked to Chattha’s account, but said no investigation had been carried out into those accounts. Defence argued that tweets by other individuals — including Nadia Baloch — were not part of the original complaint scope.

The defence also questioned whether widely circulated interviews and statements on issues such as enforced disappearances and criticism of state actions could be treated as anti-state material — asking whether books, interviews or public speeches would be subject to the same interpretation. The witness repeatedly declined to offer opinions in the absence of case-specific context.

The court adjourned the proceedings until January 5. Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha will cross‑examine witness Anis at the next hearing.