Lawyers and activists react to Imaan and Hadi’s sentencing

Political parties, parliamentarians and members of the legal community on Saturday condemned the conviction of human rights lawyer Imaan Mazari and her husband, lawyer Hadi Ali Chattha, calling the verdict “unjust” and a “grave miscarriage of justice.”

A district and sessions court in Islamabad on Saturday convicted the two men in a case related to controversial social media posts and sentenced them to 17 years in prison.

The case concerns alleged posts and reposts on X, formerly Twitter, that authorities described as “anti-state.” The National Cybercrime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) registered the case in August last year under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca) 2016, alleging that the content was intended to incite divisions and portray a negative image of state institutions.

The couple was arrested in Islamabad on Friday while reportedly heading to the district court, and the court announced its verdict today.

“Unfair and non-transparent trial”

The Tehreek-e-Tahaffuz-e-Ayeen-e-Pakistan (TTAP) condemned what it called an “unjust and non-transparent trial” and said the verdict violated “fundamental principles of judicial independence”.

In a statement, the opposition coalition said the decision reflected “an atmosphere of fear and pressure within the justice system, where political goals took priority over the administration of justice.”

He called the verdict a “stain on democracy and justice” and demanded the immediate release of the two individuals.

“Complete moral and institutional collapse”

The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf expressed concerns over the alleged mistreatment of the couple, calling it “scandalous”.

He criticized the authorities for what he called a “complete moral and institutional collapse.”

“Serious judicial error”

TTAP leader and new opposition leader in the Senate, Raja Nasir Abbas, called the verdict a “serious miscarriage of justice.”

In an article on »

He added: “The unjust sentences, procedural irregularities and apparent motivations behind this case reveal a weaponization of the law to silence dissent and intimidate those who defend vulnerable groups. »

“A fraud without a doubt”

Lawyer and civil rights activist Jibran Nasir also questioned the judge’s competence to pronounce the sentence. Nasir wrote on

He added, “We filed this transfer application on behalf of Imaan and Hadi on 05.12.2025, requesting transfer of the trial from Afzal Majoka court. The application is yet to be heard and decided.”

“This act of Justice Afzal Majoka is coram non judice. It is not a judicial order, it is a nullity, not even worth the paper it is written on,” Nasir wrote.

Condemning the decision, he said: “Imaan and Hadi are not found guilty, but this trial has proven to be a sham beyond any doubt and has caused irreparable harm to Imaan and Hadi’s right to a fair trial and the trial must therefore be considered flawed. »

“Totally illegal”

Imaan’s mother and former federal minister, Shireen Mazari, also contested the decision, calling it “totally illegal”.

“No feet to stand on”

Meanwhile, journalist Mariana Baabar called the decision “a clear message for those who stand up to challenge and question the state.”

In another tweet, she said: “When the judiciary itself makes a mockery of the law, it is duty-bound to protect it. From the beginning, the case had no basis on which to stand.”

Human rights journalist Alifya Sohail questioned the decision regarding

‘Terrible’

Lawyer and columnist Reema Omer called the ruling “appalling,” saying it should alarm anyone who believes in dissent and free speech.

Lawyer Ayman Zafar said the disturbing aspect was not only the allegations of mistreatment, but also the “increasingly casual nature” with which such complaints surfaced during court proceedings.

She said in a statement, adding that “being the subject of an investigation does not place someone beyond the protection of the law.”

Zafar said a system confident in its authority did not need to rely on discomfort or coercion to assert its control, emphasizing that if the state believed its arguments were strong, it should let the legal process speak for itself.

Any action that seems excessive, she said, distracts from the merits of a case and raises questions that don’t need to be raised in the first place.

“Punishment disguised as a process”

Constitutional lawyer Usama Khawar Ghumman said the procedure did not amount to due process, describing it as “punishment disguised as procedure”.

In a statement, he said that in a “colonial state, the process is the punishment,” adding that keeping individuals in prison for prolonged periods renders appeals meaningless. Even if the convictions were likely to be overturned on appeal, he explained that by then their freedom would have already been lost, with no compensation or accountability to the prosecution or the system.

He said the law was being used as an “instrument of control” rather than a means of justice.

“A persecution in itself”

For his part, lawyer Moiz Baig said the convictions were not a surprise, given the way the trial against the couple had proceeded.

However, he added: “What is disconcerting is the manner in which the bar has accepted its own persecution. The conviction of Imaan and Hadi sends a message to the entire bar that those who defend those persecuted by the state will also fall prey to state power.”

“An absurd mockery of justice”

Lawyer Taimur Malik called the convictions “absurd”.

He went on to say, “Expect people from PPP and PML-N to remain silent on this and also wait for their turn. »

Taimur Jhagra, former finance minister of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, called the situation a “parody of justice”.

“A totally illegal, unconstitutional and baseless order, without any basis in due process,” said digital rights activist Usama Khilji.

Journalist Benazir Shah said the move had made Pakistan even poorer, “morally and legally”.