An anti-terrorism court in Rawalpindi on Wednesday appointed a state counsel to cross-examine prosecution witnesses from the defence side in the Imaan Hadi case, after the couple’s lawyers declined to conduct the cross-examination.
ATC Judge Tahir Abbas Sipra directed Advocate Taimur Janjua to appear at the next hearing and cross-examine the witnesses on behalf of the accused, at state expense.
The case concerns the alleged disruption of an international cricket team’s security route and incitement to public unrest in 2024. Imaan Zainab Hazir-Mazari and her husband Hadi Ali Chattha, both lawyers, were indicted on October 7 and are facing a jail trial at Rawalpindi’s Adiala jail.
Defence sought adjournment; court refused
Advocate Aimal Khan Mandokhail appeared before the judge on behalf of the couple on Wednesday and requested an adjournment. The court declined, observing that the prosecution witnesses were present at the hearing and the defence could cross-examine them.
“The witnesses are present; you may proceed with the cross-examination,” Judge Sipra said.
Mandokhail replied that senior counsel Riasat Ali Azad was not present and that Azad would cross-examine the witnesses. The judge observed that the accused were lawyers themselves and could conduct the cross-examination in their own case if they wished.
The court order noted that it had been “made crystal clear” at the previous hearing that the accused should ensure the presence of their lawyers for cross-examination.
“But the defence side is reluctant, rather refused to cross-examine. Both the accused are advocates themselves, and they have been asked to cross-examine the witnesses, but they have also refused to do so. In view of that, this court has no other option but to appoint a state counsel on behalf of the accused at the state expense as provided in law,” the order read.
The court picked Janjua from a list of five lawyers provided by the Islamabad advocate general. The hearing was adjourned till Thursday, October 22.
A counsel the couple has objected to before
Janjua is not new to the couple’s legal battles. He had previously been appointed to represent Imaan and Hadi in the controversial social media posts case, an appointment the couple objected to.
In that case, Janjua had appeared in the Islamabad district and sessions court during a November hearing instead of Advocate Shakeel Jatt, the state counsel initially appointed. Jatt had refused to cross-examine the prosecution’s witnesses, saying he could not “ask questions dictated” to him. At a December hearing, Hadi informed the court that a no-confidence application had been filed against Janjua.
The latest appointment therefore revives a familiar friction. The couple’s legal team has repeatedly challenged state-appointed representation, while the courts have insisted the trial must proceed. Feature Pakistan reported earlier this month when the ATC allowed the couple to meet their own legal team ahead of these proceedings.
The Imaan Hadi case so far
Imaan and Hadi have been in jail since their arrest on January 23 in a case registered over a protest outside the Islamabad High Court, in which they were accused of manhandling the IHC Bar Association president. The arrest drew criticism from rights bodies, politicians and journalists, who stressed the couple’s right to a fair trial.
A day later, a sessions court sentenced them to 17 years on multiple charges under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca) in the social media posts case. The convictions were widely condemned by lawyers and United Nations experts.
On September 17, the Supreme Court suspended their sentences and ordered their release pending the Islamabad High Court’s final verdict on their appeals. The reprieve was short-lived: hours later, Islamabad police arrested the couple again and produced them before an ATC, which sent them to jail on judicial remand.
The fresh case was registered at the federal capital’s Kohsar police station on March 22 last year on the complaint of City Magistrate Ghulam Murtaza Chandio. Imaan and Hadi were accused of chanting anti-government slogans and blocking roads. The FIR included sections on disobedience of a public servant’s order, wrongful restraint, criminal intimidation, assault to deter a public servant and obstructing a public servant.
What happens next
The jail trial resumes on Thursday with Janjua cross-examining the prosecution witnesses. Whether the defence accepts the state counsel’s role or challenges it again will shape the next phase of a trial that has already seen walkouts, objections and repeated adjournments.
Frequently asked questions
Who is the state counsel appointed in the Imaan Hadi ATC case?
Advocate Taimur Janjua was appointed by the Rawalpindi anti-terrorism court to cross-examine prosecution witnesses from the defence side, at state expense.
Why did the court appoint a state counsel?
The court said the defence was “reluctant, rather refused” to cross-examine witnesses despite being told at the previous hearing to ensure their lawyers’ presence. The judge noted both accused are advocates who could cross-examine witnesses themselves.
What is the security breach case about?
Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali are accused of removing barriers from an international cricket team’s security route and incitement to public unrest in 2024. They were indicted on October 7 and face a jail trial at Adiala jail.
When is the next hearing?
The hearing was adjourned till Thursday, October 22.
