IHC puts off hearing in Imaan Mazari, Chattha case despite SC deadline
Why this matters: local context for readers following news across Pakistan and the region.
ISLAMABAD – The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday put off further the hearing of sentence suspension petitions filed by human rights lawyers Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and her husband Hadi Ali Chattha in a case pertaining to alleged controversial social media posts, as the Supreme Court’s directive to decide the matter by May 26 remained unimplemented. IHC Justice Muhammad Azam Khan took up the matter but it was put off due to the absence of the two members of the special prosecution team. The court was informed that one prosecutor was travelling from Lahore, while another was occupied in proceedings before the Chief Justice of the IHC. The Supreme Court had on May 12 instructed the IHC to dispose of the suspension applications within two weeks. However, the deadline could not be met as proceedings continued to face delays. During the hearing, Justice Khan noted that he was present in court specifically for this case despite other official engagements, including scheduled mediation training. He also asked whether the prosecution had taken cognisance of the Supreme Court’s directions regarding timely disposal of the matter. Counsel for the petitioners, Advocate Riasat Ali Azad, informed the court that the deadline set by the Supreme Court had already expired. Another counsel, Faisal Siddiqui, argued that prosecution representatives should ensure their presence in line with court instructions and procedural requirements. Justice Khan observed that the petitions were filed in compliance with the Supreme Court’s order, which required the high court to decide the suspension pleas within two weeks of May 12. He noted that judicial time had been allocated for the hearing. The prosecution requested an adjournment until Thursday or the following Monday. After consulting the lawyers for the petitioners regarding availability, the court fixed June 4 as the next date of hearing. The defence counsel urged the court to avoid further delays in the matter. The judge respond