Islamabad, Oct 26 (IANS) Jailed Pakistani human rights lawyer Imaan Mazari and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, on Monday moved the Pakistani Supreme Court against the Islamabad High Court’s (IHC) refusal to stay their trial before an anti-terrorism court, alleging that the proceedings were aimed at blocking their release, local media reported.
According to leading Pakistani daily Dawn, the couple filed separate but near-identical petitions through senior counsel Faisal Siddiqui, challenging the IHC’s October 19 order in a case linked to the alleged disruption of the security route of a foreign cricket team and incitement to public unrest. The two, accused of removing barriers from the route, were indicted on October 7.
The petitions alleged that the trial amounted to persecution meant to undermine the Supreme Court’s order suspending the couple’s 17-year sentences in a controversial social media post case, and to keep them behind bars through a frivolous case that had suddenly resurfaced, the report said.
They also accused the trial court of acting with unprecedented haste by recording the testimony of six prosecution witnesses on October 10 and 14 and approving the prosecution’s request to shift the trial to jail.
Mazari’s petition said the IHC had “erroneously refused to exercise its discretion to grant ad interim relief to stay the criminal trial, despite multiple factual and legal reasons warranting such relief and repeated requests”.
It argued that recording evidence in the couple’s absence violated the Code of Criminal Procedure and their fair trial rights, adding that their walkout, and their lawyers’, was a protest and not a waiver of the right to be present.
Separately, a division bench of the IHC heard the couple’s plea against their trial being held inside Adiala jail and the appointment of a state counsel.
Their lawyer, Riasat Ali Azad, told the court that the accused were being produced before what he called a “jail court”, where access was restricted, and journalists and members of the public were not allowed.
He alleged that when he sought a single adjournment, a state counsel was appointed and the prosecution witnesses were cross-examined in his absence.
Azad further said the First Information Report (FIR) in the case had been kept hidden for two years, and the couple was arrested in it immediately after securing bail from the Supreme Court. Although the original charges were bailable, a terrorism-related charge was added later, he argued.
He urged the court to restrain the trial court from announcing its final verdict until the petition was decided. Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas, observing that the accused could also be acquitted, said the court would examine the matter.
–IANS
ksk/as
