Author: Siddiq Akbar

Introduction

Akin to any nation globally, Pakistan faces a range of intricate and diverse human rights challenges. The nation’s under-represented populations, including women, minorities, and children, often encounter systemic violations of their rights, which are deeply embedded in established relations of power. Victims receive minimal rehabilitative assistance, and offenders go free. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that Pakistan is performing poorly on global indices. In terms of income, health, and education, Pakistan was firmly in the "low human development" category, ranking 164th out of 193 countries in the most recent Human Development Index (United Nations Development Programme, 2023). Before starting off, I want to say that, “No matter what you do, there is always room for betterment. What was once overlooked can evolve into a recognized right, as we have seen in matters of climate change and LGBTQ+ rights. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) seeks to safeguard civil and political rights for individuals, advocating for essential freedoms including the right to life, freedom of expression, and the right to a fair trial. It sets forth responsibilities for state parties to uphold and guarantee these rights without bias, and to offer effective solutions for any breaches. Pakistan ratified the ICCPR in 2010 to demonstrate its dedication to uphold and promote these rights on both national and international fronts. Ratification indicates Pakistan’s recognition of its responsibilities to enforce the Covenant’s terms, provide updates on advancements, and collaborate with the Human Rights Committee to resolve any concerns regarding human rights practices. This dedication is crucial for strengthening the safeguarding of individual rights within the nation and promoting responsibility and openness in leadership. The Human Rights Committee called Pakistan to brief over the situation of rights guaranteed under ICCPR on 17-18 October 2024 (Human Rights Committee, 2024). The Constitution of Pakistan (1973) includes a chapter on fundamental rights (Articles 8-28) that aligns closely with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Key provisions include the right to life (Article 9), which reflects ICCPR Article 6; equality before the law and prohibition of discrimination (Article 25), corresponding to ICCPR Article 26; freedom of expression (Article 19), akin to ICCPR Article 19, albeit with reasonable restrictions; and the right to a fair trial (Article 10A), which parallels ICCPR Article 14. Additionally, Article 14 protects against torture, aligning with ICCPR Article 7, while Articles 16 and 17 safeguard the rights to peaceful assembly and association, echoing ICCPR Articles 21 and 22. Despite these constitutional guarantees, challenges in implementation persist, underscoring the need for ongoing advocacy and reform. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in Pakistan is an independent body established to investigate human rights violations, promote awareness, and advise the government on human rights policies and legislation (Kanwel, Yasmin, & Usman, 2023).

Freedom of expression & Minority Rights

The right to express oneself is enshrined in Article 19 of the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan; however, it encounters considerable obstacles in its implementation. The media functions within a framework of stringent oversight, where regulatory measures and pressures from authorities significantly influence journalistic practices. Intimidation, bullying, and aggression towards journalists are prevalent, especially for those reporting on delicate issues. The committee showed concern about the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) 2016 in Pakistan. The risks of censorship tied to the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) have raised alarms regarding the potential for authorities to leverage this legislation against journalists, activists, and social media users who voice controversial or dissenting views (Human Rights Watch, 2023). This viewpoint creates a stifling atmosphere, where the apprehension of potential legal consequences inhibits individuals from openly sharing their thoughts online, leading to self-imposed restrictions on expression. As a result, although PECA intends to tackle cybercrime, its implementation may jeopardise the freedoms it aims to safeguard, prompting serious questions about the equilibrium between security and free expression (Amnesty International, 2022). The committee also mentioned the murder of Arshad Sharif in 2022 and showed how the journalists of Pakistan are not safe (Reporters Without Borders, 2023). Furthermore, the integrity of digital liberties is undermined by the presence of online censorship and monitoring. Advocates and community groups championing rights frequently face resistance from authorities, revealing the disparity between constitutional guarantees and real-world application, emphasizing the necessity for reforms to protect this essential right. Blasphemy statutes significantly restrict freedom of expression, leading to a stifling atmosphere. This was the point where the Pakistan delegations was ready to bounce back as the delegation clearly stated that Blasphemy laws in Pakistan under section 295 and 298 PPC are of non-discriminatory nature and are applicable to all religions including Muslims. The committee in response showed concerns about equal implementation of these laws and made comments about the mob killing of Sri Lankan citizen Priyantha Kumara in Sialkot on 3 December 2021. The erroneous application of blasphemy laws resulted in the imprisonment of 705 individuals by mid-2024, raising ongoing concerns, while the issue of forced conversions, particularly affecting Hindu girls, highlights the vulnerabilities faced by marginalised communities. Despite the presence of legislative measures, the lack of robust enforcement leaves minority groups vulnerable to socioeconomic and religious persecution. The NCHR has made significant efforts to tackle these matters but acknowledges that more thorough reforms are critically necessary, especially in addressing extremism and overhauling religious education.

Forced Disappearances and Extrajudicial Killings

Denying the undeniable, the Supreme Court transcripts obtained by Amnesty International, along with affidavits from individuals released after enforced disappearances and communications from their lawyers, reveal that government officials, especially from security forces, often employ various tactics to evade accountability for these actions (Amnesty International, 2024). When summoned by the Supreme Court and provincial high courts, officials typically deny that detentions occur, claim ignorance about the fate of the disappeared, and refuse to comply with judicial orders. They also conceal the identities of detaining authorities by transferring individuals to secret locations, threatening them with harm or re-disappearance, and file false criminal charges to obscure the reality of enforced disappearances. Even though there are many pieces of evidence and witnesses available that claim the involvement of establishment in all these detentions still no one has come out as a main culprit. The Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances was created in 2011 and has received 10,354 cases of forced disappearances out of which 8,067 were disposed of (Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances, 2024). The main concern of the committee was that there is a great difference between state reporting and civilian reports and also even though the cases have been disposed of still no culprit has been found. The committee mentioned this as the failure of higher judiciary to hold the intelligence agencies accountable. Furthermore, on the matter of extrajudicial killings, we will look into what extrajudicial killings are. The Supreme Court of Pakistan (SC) emphasised this characteristic by defining extra-legal executions as killings "which have no sanction or permission under the law or which cannot be covered or defended under any provision of law.’’ The report of Early Warning Project underscores significant concerns related to law enforcement behaviour and unlawful killings in Pakistan (Early Warning Project, 2023). This highlights the detrimental impact of excessive force in operations, inadequate planning in law enforcement, and underlying problems such as corruption and social cleansing, all of which perpetuate a cycle of violence and a lack of accountability. The Kharotabad case shows how badly things can go wrong when law enforcement uses excessive force without proper planning. In 2011, five unarmed foreigners were killed at a checkpoint in Quetta by security forces who wrongly assumed they were terrorists. One of the victims, a woman, was even seen raising her hands in surrender before being shot. This tragic mistake, caused by poor judgment and a lack of proper protocols, highlights the deep issues within the system. Cases like this not only violate people’s rights but also destroy public trust in law enforcement. Reforming these practices is essential. It involves not only enhancing the training provided to law enforcement but also fostering community engagement and establishing stronger accountability mechanisms. These reforms are critical for preventing the misuse of authority and rebuilding trust in the police and security forces, ensuring that such tragic incidents do not occur in the future (Dawn, 2011; PulseMedia, 2011). According to the report, till now in 2024 over 1200 (estimated) extrajudicial killings have been committed (Human Rights Committee, 2024).

Women Rights and gender based violence

While Pakistan delegation was explaining that women in Pakistan have all the rights and are treated equally, there came a sarcastic comment from one of the female committee members as she asked the Pakistan delegation that their delegation comprises of 11 Male Members, why not even a single woman was involved (Human Rights Committee, 2024). The Pakistan delegation just smiled without an answer. On the issue of legislation in Pak for women rights, the Pakistan delegation responded with number of legislations for women rights such as The Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act (2010), The Prevention of Domestic Violence Act (2012), The Child Marriage Restraint Act (1929, amended in 2019), The Women in Distress and Detention Fund Act (2015), The Punjab Protection of Women Against Violence Act (2016), The Punjab Commission on the Status of Women Act (2014), The Sindh Child Marriage Restraint Act (2013), The Sindh Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act (2013), The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Prevention of Violence Against Women Act (2015), The Balochistan Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act (2014) (Human Rights Watch, 2023). The Pakistan delegation also explained that in today’s Pakistan women are given immense importance in every field giving example of medical field where 47 percent doctors are female while 66 percent dentists are women (Sarfraz, Sarfraz, Sarfraz,& Qarnain, 2022). The committee showed immense concerns about implementation of these laws as child marriage is still common in Pakistan. In the matter of honor killings, the cases have dropped significantly from 241 in 2016 to 150 in 2023 (Amnesty International, 2024). Furthermore, the committee stated Pakistan's abortion laws conflict with the ICCPR by restricting women’s rights to health, privacy, and equality. The legal framework (section 312-316 and section 338 PPC) only permits abortion under very limited circumstances, primarily when a woman’s life is at risk, which endangers women’s health and autonomy (Mir, Sathar, Shah, Niazi, Parveen, & Singh, 2024). This narrow interpretation forces many women to seek unsafe abortions, violating their right to access safe healthcare services (Article 12 of ICCPR). These restrictive laws reinforce gender inequality (Article 3 of ICCPR) and hinder women’s ability to make informed decisions about their reproductive health, highlighting the need for legal reforms to align with international human rights standards. Gender-based violence (GBV) in Pakistan is a pervasive issue impacting women and marginalised groups, deeply entrenched in cultural norms and systemic discrimination. It presents itself in multiple ways, such as domestic abuse, sexual violence, honor-related killings, child marriage, and human trafficking. According to committee members, about 56 percent of women face harassment in workplaces in Pakistan (Iqbal, Chinnasamy, & Faizal, 2024). Individuals affected frequently encounter societal stigma and insufficient legal safeguards, resulting in underreporting and inadequate assistance. While there are regulations in place to tackle gender-based violence, the implementation is lacking, resulting in numerous cases remaining unaddressed. One of the critical questions asked by committee was what will happen if a woman gets pregnant in jail, and why the child has to stay in the jail for specific age limit, the committee highlighted that Pakistan doesn’t have any specific legislation regarding this matter (Human Rights Committee, 2024).

Use of the term Terrorism and NAB in Pakistan

The vast interpretation of the definition of terrorism within Pakistan's Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 faced scrutiny in HRC for its ambiguity, which permits the potential conflation of lawful dissent with acts of terrorism. This situation may result in the misuse of authority, infringements on individual rights, and a stifling atmosphere for public engagement. The broad nature of this approach poses a significant risk of disproportionately affecting minority populations and may compromise adherence to established international human rights norms. This has been misused a number of times, for instance, in March 2021, journalist Asim Saeed was arrested after covering protests against military actions in Baluchistan, facing charges of inciting violence through his reporting and charged under Anti-Terrorism Act 1997.Similarly, student activist Aasim Iqbal was detained in October 2019 for organising protests against military influence in politics, with authorities accusing him of promoting anti-state sentiments on social media (Jamil, 2024). Mohsin Dawar, a prominent political activist and member of the National Assembly, faced charges following an FIR registered in North Waziristan, where he was accused under Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act for allegedly inciting violence during protests advocating for tribal rights. Additionally, he was potentially charged under Section 124-A (sedition) for his statements perceived as anti-state. This situation illustrates the misuse of the Anti-Terrorism Act, as it enables authorities to label political dissent as terrorism, thereby criminalising legitimate advocacy and stifling free speech. The broad and vague definitions within the law allow for the suppression of voices challenging government policies, creating a chilling effect on civil liberties and political expression. The delegation of Pakistan responded with Ghulam Hussain v state 2019, where Supreme Court of Pakistan has wisely interpreted and narrowed down the definition but the committee still insisted that this definition must be narrowed down by the legislature (Criminal Appeal No. 95 of 2019). The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) in Pakistan has faced significant criticism for being used as a political tool rather than an impartial anti-corruption agency. Established to combat corruption, NAB has often been accused of selective accountability, targeting opposition leaders while sparing those affiliated with the ruling party. High-profile cases, such as those involving Nawaz Sharif and Asif Ali Zardari, have raised concerns about politically motivated investigations, especially during critical political periods. Amendments to NAB laws have further strengthened executive control, undermining its independence. International observers, including the EU and the U.S. State Department, have highlighted these issues, noting that NAB’s actions contribute to a climate of political repression and erode public trust in democratic processes. Ultimately, the misuse of NAB threatens both governance and the integrity of Pakistan’s democracy.

Final Remarks

The pervasive violations of fundamental rights in Pakistan, including the suppression of freedom of expression, forced detentions, extrajudicial killings, the infringement of women’s rights, and the misuse of institutions like NAB and anti-terrorism laws for political purposes, represent a significant departure from the principles enshrined in both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Constitution of Pakistan. These violations not only undermine the rule of law but also erode public trust in democratic institutions. To foster a just and equitable society, it is imperative for all stakeholders—government, civil society, and citizens—to advocate for the protection and promotion of these rights. Only through collective action and unwavering commitment to accountability can we hope to restore the rights guaranteed to every individual, ensuring a future where justice prevails and the voices of the marginalised are heard and respected. Now, I urge you, dear readers, to actively participate in the fight for justice and reconciliation. Engage with this issue beyond merely reading this article; become agents of change within your own communities and spheres of influence (Amnesty International, 2024). By embracing collective action and unwavering commitment, we can transform the whispers of the void into a powerful chorus of hope. Together, let’s ensure that the ghosts of martial law remain relegated to the past, never to haunt Pakistan’s future again. Your voice and actions matter—let’s make them count!