Pakistan Jails Rights Lawyers for 10 Years Over Cricket Security Breach

Key points

• Judge Tahir Abbas Sipra found the couple guilty of putting the England cricket team at risk, despite noting the incident was a common barrier removal.
• The couple pleaded not guilty, stating they were 'prisoners of conscience' targeted for their human rights work.
• They were previously sentenced to 17 years under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act in January 2026, a sentence suspended by the Supreme Court in September.
• Police re-arrested the couple on the same day the Supreme Court granted bail in the cybercrime case, initiating the current anti-terrorism trial.
• The trial took place inside Adiala prison, with the defendants kept behind a cage-like structure, according to Amnesty International.

Background

This case follows a pattern of legal action against critics of the Pakistani state. In September 2026, the Supreme Court suspended 17-year sentences for Mazari and Chattha under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, but they were immediately re-arrested on new charges. This occurs amid broader concerns over judicial independence, highlighted by recent constitutional amendments and the resignation of several judges in protest against executive interference. The couple are known for representing activists and families of those subjected to enforced disappearances.

How outlets are covering it

Al Jazeera and AP News report the factual details of the conviction, noting the judge’s concession that the barrier removal was an 'ordinary type of incident.' Amnesty International and the couple’s relatives, including former human rights minister Shireen Mazari, strongly criticize the process, labeling it a 'sham trial' that denies due process. Amnesty’s Yasmine Ahmed argues the anti-terrorism charges are a tool to punish human rights advocacy, while Pakistan’s law minister maintains the judiciary is independent. The sources agree on the timeline but differ on the interpretation of the trial’s fairness and the motive behind the prosecution.

Why it matters

The conviction signals a continued crackdown on dissent in Pakistan, using anti-terrorism and cybercrime laws to silence human rights defenders. It raises questions about the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law, particularly as international organizations warn that such actions create a chilling effect on civil society and legal advocacy.

What to watch

The defense plans to file a petition against the verdict in the Supreme Court. The couple’s bail applications in a separate protest case remain pending. Observers will watch for further judicial resignations or international pressure regarding the treatment of political prisoners and the integrity of the legal system.