• NCCIA argues petitions are premature and urges court to first decide its application
• High court decides it will first rule on prosecution’s objection before considering merits of sentence suspension requests

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Friday reserved its order on the maintainability of petitions seeking the suspension of the sentences awarded to lawyers and rights activists Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and her spouse, Hadi Ali Chattha, in the controversial tweets case, after the prosecution argued that the petitions had been filed prematurely.

On Jan 24, the rights lawyers were sentenced by an Islamabad sessions court to a total of 17 years in prison on multiple charges under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca).

Following their convictions, which were widely condemned by lawyers and United Nations (UN) experts, the couple challenged the trial court’s judgement before the IHC on Feb 7.

Justice Muhammad Azam Khan heard the petitions filed by the two convicts against the trial court’s judgement.

At the outset of the hearing, the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA), through its counsel, raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the petitions seeking suspension of the sentences.

The prosecution contended that the petitions were premature and urged the court to first decide its separate application challenging their maintainability.

The NCCIA’s counsel argued that if the suspension of sentence petitions were heard before the court ruled on the agency’s objection, the prosecution’s application would become ineffective.

Representing Ms Mazari and Mr Chattha, Advocate Faisal Siddiqui submitted that he was prepared to argue the prosecution’s objection immediately.

He stated that if the prosecution maintained that the suspension of sentence petitions were not maintainable, both matters should be heard together.

Justice Khan, however, advised the defence counsel to prepare his arguments, observing that doing so would be in the best interest of his clients’ rights.

“You should prepare first. It is good for your rights,” the judge remarked.

Advocate Siddiqui responded that he was waiving that right and was ready to proceed with arguments.

“I waive my rights. I am ready to present my arguments,” he told the court.

After hearing both sides, Justice Khan observed that the court would first decide the prosecution’s objection regarding the maintainability of the suspension of sentence petitions before considering the merits of the requests for suspension of the sentences.

The court subsequently reser-ved its order on the prosecu-tion’s application.

Published in Dawn, July 25th, 2026