Right to life: Vague definition of anti-terror law troubles panelists

Say removing moratorium on death penalty, imposition of NAP a knee-jerk reaction

ISLAMABAD: Panelists at a session on the death penalty on Monday expressed concerns over regular criminals being tried under the anti-terrorism law owing to vague definition of terrorism and a flawed criminal justice system.

Speaking at a day-long event titled “Preserving the Right to Life” organised by the Justice Project Pakistan (JPP), they also highlighted the danger and unfairness of death penalty with so many flaws in the system.

JPP director Sarah Belal said that as many as 420 people had been executed in Pakistan since the moratorium on death penalty was lifted in December 2014.

“Of these 420, only one in every 15 had something to do with terrorism,” she said.

Legal expert Muhammad Oves Anwar said that the definition of terrorism was too vague and too broad, as a result of which people accused of rape or even cattle theft have been tried under anti-terror law.



“Even police don’t understand this definition most of the time. There is a need to differentiate between acts of terrorism and normal criminal acts,” he said.

Discussing issues with the criminal justice system of Pakistan, former police officer Muhammad Ali Nekokara said there was a disconnect and mistrust between police, prosecutors, judiciary and the lawyers.

“Relationship between police and prosecutors is dysfunctional, which leads to acquittals. There is a need for institutional arrangements for coordination between these members of the criminal justice system,” he said.

Nekokara said the definition of terrorism in anti-terrorism act (ATA) was quite vague and open to misuse. He also cited a study which found that only 4.6 per cent of cases registered under ATA in Punjab involved clear terror acts such as bombings.

“The rest were police encounters and murder cases etc,” he revealed.

Nekokara added that about 90 per cent of the police force in the country had only ten years of education and stressed the need for improved training for police and prosecutors.

Rights activist Jibran Nasir said that anti-terror laws were passed to prosecute extremists and members of banned outfits, but the law was not being applied to banned terror outfits and only regular criminals were being tried under it.

“Pakistan has been a reactionary state. When the government failed to protect the nation, they came up with NAP … we as a society have a fixation with the death penalty,” Nasir said as he recalled how many had called for public executions after the APS Peshawar massacre.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 25^th, 2016.