Social media posts case: Tension in courtroom as lawyers of rival parties get emotional

ISLAMABAD: The courtroom nearly erupted into chaos on Tuesday as tensions soared during a hearing in the social media posts case registered against lawyers Imaan Zainab Mazari and her spouse, Hadi Ali Chattha, with both sides’ lawyers on the verge of physical confrontation after a heated exchange at the court.

The case, which concerns accusations of spreading anti-state narratives, took a dramatic turn during the cross-examination of prosecution witnesses, revealing procedural discrepancies.

Additional District and Sessions Judge Muhammad Afzal Majoka, while hearing the case registered against the couple under Sections 9, 10, 11, and 26-A of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) over alleged anti-state remarks on social media, adjourned the case till January 5 after the cross-examination of prosecution witnesses.

The National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) was challenged on several fronts, with defence lawyers highlighting gaps in official records and testimony.

During cross-examination, NCCIA Naib Qasid Afzal admitted he lacked basic documentation, such as a contract and service card. He also acknowledged that official letters from October 16 and 20 did not include the time of receipt. Defence counsel pointed to inconsistencies in signatures on official documents, questioning their authenticity.

Another prosecution witness, Wasim, confirmed he had been working with the NCCIA since its creation, but was carrying an FIA service card instead of an NCCIA card.

He also admitted the USB containing evidence was not sealed and that he lacked a written contract detailing his job responsibilities.

The most contentious testimony came from technical expert Anis, who had prepared forensic reports for the case.

Anis testified that he analyzed posts related to the accused but conceded that neither the complaint nor the investigation scope mentioned certain individuals, including those from the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM), who were only declared proscribed in 2024.

He maintained the accused were spreading a “state-hostile narrative,” which the defence strongly disputed. Tempers flared when sharp comments led to a near-physical altercation between the prosecution and defence. Police had to intervene to restore order.

Judge Majoka later instructed the prosecution to apologise for the inappropriate language and reminded both sides to address objections through the court.

After a brief recess, further testimony revealed that other social media accounts had reposted similar content, but no investigation was launched against them. The witness confirmed that the inquiry was limited only to the accused.

The court adjourned the proceedings until January 5, when the cross-examination of the technical expert will continue.

The case centers on a complaint filed by the NCCIA on August 12, 2025, accusing Mazari of spreading narratives linked to terrorist groups.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025