President Zardari signs Fair Trial Bill 2012 into law

The bill puts civil liberties under threat.


Our Correspondent February 20, 2013
A file photo of President Asif Ali Zardari. PHOTO: AFP

ISLAMABAD: President Asif Ali Zardari signed the Fair Trial Bill 2012 into law on Wednesday, which empowers Pakistan's spy agencies to intercept private communications in order to catch terrorists.

Under the new law, intelligence and law enforcement agencies will now be able to tap phone calls, emails, SMS, internet communication and conduct human intelligence of any individual on suspicion of their involvement in terrorist activities. The evidence collected through such surveillance will also be admissible in a court of law, subject to issuance of prior surveillance warrants by a judge.

The bill, which was originally passed in December 2012, had triggered a controversy after certain quarters felt that the wire-tapping powers would threaten privacy and civil liberties.

However, the Senate unanimously passed the ordinance on February 1 despite objections from both the opposition as well as government allies.

Earlier, the bill had been contested by sections of the civil society that view this bill as a fundamental compromise on the civil liberties of Pakistani citizens.

The president also signed the Trade Organisation Bill 2012 today.

The bill aims to ensure appropriate representation of all genders at all levels in trade organisations.

COMMENTS (11)

NAUMAN CH | 11 years ago | Reply

After all good move against RAW AND TTP

fatima | 11 years ago | Reply

Civil rights? Since when are civil rights respected in Pakistan? The day there were mass murders of shias? Let's not go into civil rights because it is a known fact that no one in Pakistan has any. The government could have been tapping phones and accessing our private information without asking the court -- And the govt probably was. Why ask the court now? Who knows -- to make it seem like they're actually trying to reduce the terrorism in the country because if they really were - there wouldn't have been that many acquittals in cases that clearly required immediate action.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ