ATC Seeks Report on Imaan Mazari, Hadi Chattha Court Absence

An anti-terrorism court in Islamabad sought an explanation from jail authorities on Saturday after human rights lawyer Imaan Mazari and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, were not produced before the court despite an earlier order in a case linked to the removal of security barriers set up for the English cricket team.

The proceedings were heard by ATC Judge Tahir Abbas Sipra, who questioned why the two accused had not been brought before the court. The judge directed prosecution and police officials to contact jail authorities and obtain a written explanation for their non-production.

The couple had been indicted earlier in the week in the same case. They opposed the framing of charges, arguing that they had not received copies of the case record and had not been allowed to meet their lawyers. Their legal team also maintained that they had challenged the framing of charges before the Islamabad High Court.

During the hearing, Advocate Aimal Khan requested the court to ensure the personal appearance of both accused. He pointed out that an earlier order had required authorities to produce them either physically or through a video link. The couple were later produced through video link, while Dr Shireen Mazari and lawyers Zainab Janjua and Aimal Khan also appeared in court.

The court was informed that the matter was pending before the Islamabad High Court, where a petition against the framing of charges was scheduled for hearing on Monday. The defence sought an adjournment until the high court reviewed the challenge, but the trial court noted that proceedings were not automatically suspended merely because the matter had been taken to a higher forum.

The judge also raised questions over courtroom procedure after photographs were reportedly taken during earlier proceedings. A temporary ban on mobile phones inside the courtroom was imposed, but it was later lifted after court reporters requested reconsideration.

When the hearing resumed, the court noted that jail authorities had submitted a report stating that Islamabad Police had failed to provide an escort to bring the accused to court. The court observed that the couple could not be produced physically because the required police security had not been arranged.

The defence argued that the state was seeking to proceed with witness statements while also failing to ensure the accused could appear before the court. The lawyer maintained that this failure affected the right to a fair trial, especially when the accused had challenged the legal basis of the charges.

The court ultimately disposed of the petition seeking to drop the terrorism charges at this stage, saying the relief could not be granted without hearing arguments from the lawyers representing both accused. Proceedings were adjourned pending the jail administration’s report and further legal process.