Amnesty International Condemns 10-Year Jail Sentences for Pakistani Human Rights Lawyer Imaan Mazari and Husband

Amnesty International has strongly criticised Pakistan’s judicial system after an anti-terrorism court sentenced prominent human rights lawyer Imaan Mazari and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, to 10 years in prison in a security-related case. The organisation accused Pakistani authorities of misusing anti-terrorism laws to suppress dissent and silence human rights defenders.

Yasmin Ahmed, Amnesty International’s Senior Director for Regional Human Rights, described the verdict as a serious indictment of Pakistan’s justice system.

She said anti-terrorism legislation was being abused to silence human rights activists and suppress dissent. During the trial, lawyers were initially prevented from appearing in person. Later, after proceedings were moved to the prison premises, the defendants were reportedly made to sit behind a cage-like structure.

Ahmed stressed that the two lawyers were being subjected to such treatment for exercising their right to peaceful assembly and speaking out in defence of human rights.

Mazari and Chattha are known for advocating on behalf of marginalised communities, including victims of enforced disappearances, unjust state prosecutions and blasphemy laws.

On January 24, they were sentenced to prison terms ranging from 10 to 17 years under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) over social media posts criticising the military and expressing solidarity with Baloch and Pashtun activists.

Although Pakistan’s Supreme Court suspended their sentences and granted them bail on September 17, they were reportedly arrested again on separate anti-terrorism charges on the same day.

The cases are linked to several past incidents, including alleged unrest during protests by Baloch activists in March 2025 and the removal of security barriers during a cricket match in 2024.

The latest verdict comes amid growing nationwide concerns over the independence of Pakistan’s judiciary following the 26th and 27th constitutional amendments.

The case has further intensified criticism of the country's use of anti-terrorism legislation against activists, lawyers and individuals expressing dissent.