The Supreme Court of Pakistan has scheduled a hearing for July 6 on the petitions filed by lawyer and activist Imaan Mazari and her husband Hadi Ali Chattha, who are seeking suspension of their 17-year prison sentences. The sentences were handed down by a trial court over controversial social media posts.
Bench Composition and Background
A three-member bench headed by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, and comprising Justice Mussarat Hilali and Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan, will take up the matter. According to the petitioners, despite repeated requests by the defense counsel for suspension of the trial court's judgment, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) only issued notices on the suspension applications on February 19 and did not suspend the couple's sentences.
Earlier, on May 12, a different three-member Supreme Court bench, headed by Justice Shahid Waheed, had directed the IHC to decide the applications "preferably within two weeks" while hearing petitions filed by the couple. However, the IHC has yet to comply with that directive, leaving the matter pending before the apex court.
Procedural Developments
The case is now before a differently constituted Supreme Court bench. It remains unclear whether the case was assigned to the new bench by the three-member committee constituted under the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act. The IHC last heard the matter on June 1, when the prosecution sought time to prepare its arguments. The hearing was adjourned until June 4. However, the cause list for June 4 was cancelled on June 2, and the case has not been relisted since then.
Faisal Siddiqi, counsel for Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha, subsequently approached the Supreme Court seeking an early hearing of the matter. Interestingly, the petitions have now been listed before another Supreme Court bench.
Possible Outcomes
Legal observers suggest that the bench may adopt one of three courses: refer the matter back to the IHC with directions for its early disposal, withdraw the apex court's May 12 order, or decide the sentence suspension applications itself.
Meanwhile, the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) has challenged the Supreme Court's earlier order directing the IHC to decide the couple's suspension applications within a specified timeframe. In a concise statement submitted before the court in the same case, the NCCIA argued that the Supreme Court has a consistent and long-standing practice of not interfering in matters pending before high courts at the initial or interlocutory stage, except in extraordinary or highly exceptional circumstances.
