For effective prosecution, better anti-terrorism laws needed: speakers
Participants at discussion focus on Pakistan’s “vague laws”.
ISLAMABAD:
Pakistan needs effective anti-terrorism legislation to ensure punishment for those behind terrorist attacks and could look towards innovative models implemented by other countries for guidance.
At a roundtable discussion organised by the Pakistan Institute of Legal Development and Transparency (PILDAT) on Tuesday, a British expert on counterterrorism, Lord Alex Carlile, shared his experience and briefed the participants about anti-terrorism laws in the United Kingdom (UK).
Carlile served as the UK’s Independent Reviewer of Counter Terrorism Legislation from 2001 to 2011 and is currently the independent reviewer of national security arrangements in Northern Ireland.
The roundtable was attended by parliamentarians, retired military officers and members of civil society. Shahid Hamid, a Supreme Court advocate and former governor of Punjab, chaired the roundtable.
He said Pakistan’s conviction rate in serious terrorism cases is far lower than the country’s conviction rate for ordinary murder. Hamid said one of the problems with the existing anti-terrorism act in Pakistan is that its definition of terrorism is broad and could even include protesters pelting stones at the police after being subjected to tear gas.
Carlile said Pakistan is a frontline state in the fight against terrorism and there should be sharing of wisdom between the international community and Pakistan.
“We are here to find a shared solution to a shared problem,” he said, observing that both Pakistan and the UK have experienced terrorism, albeit with differences in scale and frequency.
Carlile stressed the need for a “safe, well-protected, trained and independent” judiciary to deal with anti-terrorism cases.
He said one of the reasons the conviction ratio for terrorism cases in the UK is high is that UK prosecutors have been able to build strong cases on the basis of overwhelming forensic evidence, which includes the use of cell phone tracing to track the movement of terror suspects.
Ahmed Bilal Mehboob, executive director of PILDAT, said acts of terrorism on Pakistani soil pose a ‘gigantic challenge’ for the country.
“This challenge cannot be met by the security forces alone unless we have a robust legal framework and our legal and judicial system is effectively dealing with the profound challenges of adjudicating cases involving terrorism,” Mehboob said.
The Anti-Terrorism (Amendment) Bill 2010, which was tabled in the Senate in July 2010 and sought to make 25 amendments to the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1997, was reportedly withdrawn after sitting with the Standing Committee on Interior for two years, Mehboob said.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 1st, 2012.
Pakistan needs effective anti-terrorism legislation to ensure punishment for those behind terrorist attacks and could look towards innovative models implemented by other countries for guidance.
At a roundtable discussion organised by the Pakistan Institute of Legal Development and Transparency (PILDAT) on Tuesday, a British expert on counterterrorism, Lord Alex Carlile, shared his experience and briefed the participants about anti-terrorism laws in the United Kingdom (UK).
Carlile served as the UK’s Independent Reviewer of Counter Terrorism Legislation from 2001 to 2011 and is currently the independent reviewer of national security arrangements in Northern Ireland.
The roundtable was attended by parliamentarians, retired military officers and members of civil society. Shahid Hamid, a Supreme Court advocate and former governor of Punjab, chaired the roundtable.
He said Pakistan’s conviction rate in serious terrorism cases is far lower than the country’s conviction rate for ordinary murder. Hamid said one of the problems with the existing anti-terrorism act in Pakistan is that its definition of terrorism is broad and could even include protesters pelting stones at the police after being subjected to tear gas.
Carlile said Pakistan is a frontline state in the fight against terrorism and there should be sharing of wisdom between the international community and Pakistan.
“We are here to find a shared solution to a shared problem,” he said, observing that both Pakistan and the UK have experienced terrorism, albeit with differences in scale and frequency.
Carlile stressed the need for a “safe, well-protected, trained and independent” judiciary to deal with anti-terrorism cases.
He said one of the reasons the conviction ratio for terrorism cases in the UK is high is that UK prosecutors have been able to build strong cases on the basis of overwhelming forensic evidence, which includes the use of cell phone tracing to track the movement of terror suspects.
Ahmed Bilal Mehboob, executive director of PILDAT, said acts of terrorism on Pakistani soil pose a ‘gigantic challenge’ for the country.
“This challenge cannot be met by the security forces alone unless we have a robust legal framework and our legal and judicial system is effectively dealing with the profound challenges of adjudicating cases involving terrorism,” Mehboob said.
The Anti-Terrorism (Amendment) Bill 2010, which was tabled in the Senate in July 2010 and sought to make 25 amendments to the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1997, was reportedly withdrawn after sitting with the Standing Committee on Interior for two years, Mehboob said.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 1st, 2012.