SC Suspends Sentences, Couple Remanded Again
In a dramatic turn of events in Islamabad, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has suspended the 17‑year sentences imposed on human‑rights lawyer Imaan Zainab Mazari‑Hazir and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, following a two‑judge bench decision. The couple, who had been released on bail pending the High Court’s final verdict, were immediately taken back into custody by an anti‑terrorism court (ATC) and placed on judicial remand, sparking fresh controversy over the use of legal mechanisms to control dissent.
The Supreme Court’s order came after the apex court reviewed the couple’s appeal against the Islamabad High Court’s refusal to suspend the sentences in February. Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim granted bail with a surety bond of Rs200,000 for each, citing the defendants’ status as practising advocates and the need to preserve their honour. The court also converted the petitions into appeals, effectively halting the execution of the January 24 conviction while the High Court deliberates.
Despite the Supreme Court’s intervention, the ATC rejected the police’s request for a 30‑day physical remand and instead sent the couple to jail on judicial remand. The decision was made after the couple appeared before the court in a separate case registered at Kohsar police station on March 22, 2025. The FIR in that case, filed by the City Magistrate Ghulam Murtaza Chandio, accused the couple of chanting anti‑government slogans and obstructing public servants, though no anti‑terrorism provisions were added at the time of registration.
Legal experts and United Nations officials have condemned the rapid succession of arrests and convictions, arguing that the charges under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca) and the Anti‑Terrorism Act (ATA) are being used to suppress lawful protest and free expression. The couple’s initial conviction on January 24 followed a sessions court ruling that sentenced them to 10 years for cyber‑terrorism, five years for glorification of an offence, and two years for false information, all to run concurrently.
Political analysts note that the case reflects a broader trend of using anti‑terrorism and cyber‑crime legislation to target activists and lawyers. The Supreme Court’s suspension of the sentences is seen as a check on executive overreach, yet the subsequent remand raises questions about the balance between national security and civil liberties. The High Court’s forthcoming decision will likely set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future.
As Islamabad watches the legal proceedings unfold, the international community remains vigilant. The United Nations and several human‑rights organisations have called for a transparent review of the charges and for the protection of the couple’s right to a fair trial. The outcome of the High Court’s deliberations will be closely monitored by both domestic and global observers.
