As so often, it is the single telling case that testifies more eloquently to the broader reality than any number of generalisations. Sayed Pervez Kambaksh's experience of Afghanistan's justice is one such case. Almost 18 months ago he was arrested for allegedly circulating an article about women's rights. After a judicial process riddled with irregularities, he was found guilty of blasphemy and sentenced to death.

The commuted sentence prompted two further appeals: one from the prosecution, which wanted the death penalty reinstated, the other from the defence, demanding that the sentence be quashed. The result of that appeal, in so far as it happened, is now known. A secretive hearing, which took place before Mr Kambaksh's defence counsel had even submitted the evidence to make his case, determined that the 20-year term should stand. By any possible measure, 20 years for circulating an article about women's rights – likely to be served in Afghanistan's most notorious prison – would make a mockery of any judicial system. That this system has been lavishly funded, and supposedly reformed, by Western assistance shows, at very least, how very limited the effects of that help have been.

The only avenue now open to Mr Kambaksh is a personal appeal to President Karzai for a pardon. It is an appeal that Mr Kambaksh must lodge, for the sake of all Afghans who see their future in a law-governed state. As such, it is bound to test Mr Karzai's will and his vision for Afghanistan's future. But it will also test his political credibility. With his government coming under increasing pressure, both political and military, from Taliban forces, he could find it hard to resist the encroachment of fundamentalist forces.

It is not only President Karzai, however, who faces a dilemma. The visible decline of his power as the Taliban recovers more and more ground confronts the West and the Nato forces operating in Afghanistan with some equally delicate decisions. The new US President has already announced the dispatch of 17,000 more American troops in an immediate effort to improve security. But his administration is also nearing the end of a review of the whole Afghan operation.

It is expected that its recommendations will include requests for a greater contribution from the European allies, including Britain, but not necessarily of a military nature. The emphasis, it is already becoming clear, is likely to shift from combat to the building of infrastructure and institutions. And a key aspect of this shift, as recent statements from US administration officials have indicated, could be talks at some level with the Taliban.

The idea seems to be that those members of the Taliban whose prime objective is peace and security can be split from extremists whose aims are religious and ideological. How feasible this will be in practice remains to be seen. But the fate of Pervez Kambaksh will inevitably be a harbinger of where his country is heading – the very human face of the predicament now facing Afghanistan and the West.

Last year there were protests in 15 provinces on a single day, to try to get justice for Pervez. The people who marched were marching for democracy, marching for justice, and they have been disappointed. These people are the future of Afghanistan, but they have been ignored by the people who are fighting against democracy and against human rights. They are fundamentalists. Some of them are criminals. Some of them are powerful. Some of them are in the government, and they are playing political games with the fate of an innocent man.

They don't care about my brother, and they don't care about the rule of law. But we know their time will end. These fundamentalists have put pressure on the court. No one expected this cruel and unjust decision, and we are all in shock.

When we moved the case to Kabul we thought we would get justice. We thought we could trust the courts. We thought we could trust the judges.

We were wrong. There is no rule of law, not even at the Supreme Court in Kabul, so what chance have people in the provinces got?

When I saw my brother yesterday he was in shock and very concerned about his safety. But he knows how many people are supporting him, and that gives him strength. It gives me strength, too.

Right now we don't know what to do. The legal process is exhausted. We are facing many difficulties, but we cannot give up.

We must struggle for justice. We must struggle for free speech. Our society cannot live without these values.

God willing, we will win.

The author is Pervez's brother.

Sayed Pervez Kambaksh, the student journalist sentenced to death for blasphemy in Afghanistan, has been told he will spend the next 20 years in jail after the country's highest court ruled against him – without even hearing his defence.

The 23-year-old, brought to worldwide attention after an Independent campaign, was praying that Afghanistan's top judges would quash his conviction for lack of evidence, or because he was tried in secret and convicted without a defence lawyer. Instead, almost 18 months after he was arrested for allegedly circulating an article about women's rights, any hope of justice and due process evaporated amid gross irregularities, allegations of corruption and coercion at the Supreme Court. Justices issued their decision in secret, without letting Mr Kambaksh's lawyer submit so much as a word in his defence.

Afzal Nooristani, the legal campaigner representing Mr Kambaksh, accused the judges of behaving "no better than the Taliban". Hundreds of millions of dollars have been poured into Afghanistan's legal system and 149 British soldiers have died there since 2001, but experts admit that state justice is still beyond the reach of most ordinary Afghans.

A Kabul appeals court has quashed a death sentence imposed on the Afghan student Sayed Pervez Kambaksh for downloading information from the internet on women's rights.

The judges ruled however, that the 24-year-old trainee journalist should serve 20 years in jail – a decision Mr Kambaksh's lawyers insisted was unconstitutional and should be overturned by the country's supreme court.

The appeal court decision was seen as a major legal victory for Mr Kambaksh. According to the defence team, as well as a number of other legal experts, the court had the power to uphold or set aside the death sentence, but it had no right to "arbitrarily" impose a jail term.

A petition by the readers of The Independent to secure justice for Mr Kambaksh had attracted more than 100,000 signatures and won the backing of human rights groups and international statesmen. Yesterday the student's family said they had already received widespread messages of support and were confident he would be freed in the next stage of the legal process.

During yesterday's hearing, one of the prosecution's main witnesses, a fellow student, Hamid Ali, appeared to withdraw his testimony against Mr Kambaksh, who was also prevented by the judge from addressing the court over his protestations that an alleged "confession" had been beaten out of him.

After the hearing, Mr Kambaksh said: "I was, of course, hoping to be freed, but the fact that they have said I no longer face the death sentence is a big relief. I really did not think I would last this long. I thought they would make sure that I disappeared. Hearing the judge say that long sentence was very surprising, but I now just want to continue with the legal cases and, hopefully, I'll get freed. I also want to say I am very grateful to everyone, especially The Independent, for what they have done so far and I would be very grateful if they would continue to support me."

Amnesty International appealed for Mr Kambaksh to be freed. "There are no legal grounds for either his conviction or this sentence," said Sam Zarifi, its Asia Pacific director. "While it can only be a positive step that he is no longer on death row, he should be freed immediately."

Mr Kambaksh's lawyer, Mohammed Afzal Nuristani, said: "There were a lot of irregular things at the appeal court like the judge not letting my client speak about the torture he has suffered. It was also very good for Pervez that their main witness, Hamid, did not incriminate him in his evidence. These are matters I can raise with the Supreme Court. The first thing I am going to do is challenge the 20-year sentence. This court had no right to impose that. This will take another few months, but at least they are not going to hang him and we now have time."

Mr Kambaksh was convicted in January 2007 after students at his local university accused him of disseminating material on women's rights which "insulted Islam". In an earlier interview at Balkh prison he said the trial lasted just four minutes and he was not allowed to speak in his defence before being sentenced to death. Even the head of the jail where he is being held, General Taj Mohammed, said that, in his view, Mr Kambaksh should be freed.

The first appeal hearing took place in May. Since then there have been a number of adjournments which the student's lawyers blame on prosecutors.

Yesterday, Mr Kambaksh's brother, Sayed Yaqub Ibrahimi, said: "Pervez has now been in prison for more than two years for no reason at all. What happened today [at the appeal court] was because there are still extremist people in this country who want us to stay at a dark time. The trial was very unfair and they came to a decision which all the lawyers tell us is illegal. We hope the Supreme Court will now take the right course and Pervez will be freed one day soon."

A