The Islamabad lower courts were relatively quiet on 24th January 2026, as the local bar had announced a strike because two of its lawyers had been arrested in an unlawful manner and were now likely to face what effectively amounts to silencing dissent. The judgment ultimately ended up creating a template for digital authoritarianism and providing us again with a reminder that any state can easily warp its own legal tools to punish its own conscience.

The trial court’s verdict against Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and Hadi Ali Chattha remains a ‘milestone’ in our chequered constitutional history. It was handed down while they sat as captive spectators over a video link from Central Jail, Rawalpindi.

The allegations in simple terms were related to defending marginalised people from the peripheries, speaking out against enforced disappearances, and demanding justice for political dissidents. The state maintains that the number of missing persons has gone down significantly, that issues of people in the peripheries are being managed by one of the most progressive parties in the country, and that political dissent undermines any economic progress.

Whose narrative is more factual? History shall judge that on its own merits, but the message was clear that the cost of participation and protest is no longer the same.

My take is not based on legal largesse, but relates to a fundamental question which both the state and society........

© The Friday Times