ISLAMABAD: Additional District and Sessions Judge Muhammad Afzal on Monday completed the cross-examination of prosecution witness Anisur Rehman in the controversial tweets case against lawyer Iman Mazari and activist Hadi Ali Chatha.
During the hearing, both Iman and Hadi appeared before the court. On the prosecution’s request, the court initially adjourned proceedings, after which Hadi resumed the cross-examination of the witness. During questioning, Hadi’s counsel asked the witness how many blasphemy-related cases he had prepared reports for. Anisur Rehman replied that he did not remember the exact number and was unaware of whether live hearings had been held in the High Court in blasphemy cases. He stated that he holds an MPhil degree in Computer Science and has undergone departmental training, including workshops on the Peca Act, cybercrime, and the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) but had not conducted any training related to enforced disappearance cases.
The witness stated that, according to his understanding, the term “state” refers to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. When asked to identify any tweet containing anti-state content, Anis said the tweets reflected a particular “narrative” but did not contain references to armed struggle. He added that he had used the term “disinformation vector” in his report and described the content as manipulation-based, though he admitted he could not further explain the term at that moment.
The witness confirmed that the individuals mentioned in his report were the same people who had reposted Iman’s content. He stated that he had not mentioned any other individuals against the relevant accused in his report.
At one point, Iman’s counsel requested a postponement, citing an upcoming event attended by the chief minister. The prosecutor objected, stating that it was a political event, while the defence argued it was organized by the bar association. The court briefly took a break before resuming proceedings. Upon resumption, Anis stated that, according to his knowledge, all the tweets in question supported the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and other banned organizations. However, when shown a specific tweet from the case file, he conceded that it did not mention the BLA or the TTP by name but claimed the “narrative” was the same. He described the tweets as fake, anti-state, and based on false information.
The witness said he did not remember the date when Mahrang Baloch was banned and stated that he had checked the Nacta website while preparing his report. He maintained that spreading the narrative of banned organizations or individuals constituted a crime.
Hadi also referred to a national English newspaper report published on July 31, 2025, regarding the Haq Do Tehreek Balochistan, which quoted statements by Marriyum Aurangzeb and Maulana Hidayat-ur-Rehman. The witness declined to offer an opinion, stating that he would comment only if such a case came before him.
Similarly, when asked about statements made by Barrister Aqeel Malik in Arab News regarding negotiations with Mahrang Baloch, Anis said he would not comment unless a case was presented to him. The witness stated that “terrorism has a uniform behind it” and referred to slogans raised against the state. A video clip of Maryam Nawaz’s speech was also played in court. When asked whether slogans raised during the event fell under anti-state activity, the witness said he would comment only after reviewing the complete video. He said he was unaware whether enforced disappearances constituted a serious issue in Pakistan, whether a commission on missing persons existed, or what the state policy on missing persons was. He also said he did not know whether the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and the Ahle Sunnat Wal Jamaat were banned organizations.
Videos of events allegedly organized by the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and the Ahle Sunnat Wal Jamaat were played in court. The defence argued that police arrangements for such events were visible in the footage. The witness again declined to comment, saying that he would respond only if a case came to him.After completion of the cross-examination by both Iman Mazari and Hadi Ali Chatha, the court adjourned the hearing until January 7 (tomorrow).
