IHC reserves order on maintainability of Imaan, Hadi’s petitions seeking suspension of sentences

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Friday reserved its order on the maintainability of petitions seeking suspension of the sentences awarded to lawyers and rights activists Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and Hadi Ali Chattha in the controversial tweets case after the prosecution argued that the pleas had been filed prematurely.

On January 24, rights lawyers Imaan and Hadi were sentenced by an Islamabad sessions court to a total of 17 years in jail on multiple charges under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca).

Following their convictions, which were widely condemned by lawyers and United Nations (UN) experts, the couple challenged their convictions before the IHC on February 7.

Justice Muhammad Azam Khan heard the petitions filed by the two convicts against the trial court’s judgment.

At the outset of the hearing, the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA), through its counsel, raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the suspension of sentence petitions.

The prosecution contended that the petitions were premature and urged the court to decide its separate application challenging their admissibility first.

The NCCIA counsel argued that if the suspension of sentence petitions were heard before the NCCIA’s objection was decided, the prosecution’s application would become ineffective.

Representing Imaan and Hadi, Advocate Faisal Siddiqui submitted that he was prepared to argue the prosecution’s objection immediately.

He said that if the prosecution insisted that the suspension of sentence petitions were not maintainable, both matters should be heard together.

Justice Khan, however, advised the defence counsel to prepare his arguments, observing that it would be in the interest of his clients’ rights. “You should prepare first. It is good for your rights,” the judge remarked.

Advocate Siddiqui replied that he was waiving that right and was ready to proceed with arguments. “I waive my rights. I am ready to give arguments,” he told the court.

After hearing both sides, Justice Khan observed that the court would first decide the prosecution’s objection regarding the maintainability of the suspension of sentence petitions before taking up the merits of the requests for suspension of sentence.

The court subsequently reserved its order on the prosecution’s application.