Lahore [Pakistan], September 5 (ANI): The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) has raised serious objections to the Punjab Anti-Terrorism (Amendment) Bill 2026, warning that the new provisions could weaken constitutional safeguards and provide excessive powers to the state in the name of security, as reported by Dawn.
According to Dawn, HRCP expressed concern over provisions allowing certain proceedings to be classified as “special security cases”. Under the amended framework, an officer authorised by the government, whose identity would remain confidential, could make such a designation.
The most contentious aspect of the legislation is that once a case receives the special-security classification, the identities of judges, prosecutors, police officials, witnesses and defence lawyers could also be kept secret.
The HRCP argues that the law fails to establish sufficiently precise conditions governing when these extraordinary measures may be invoked. In its assessment, this lack of clarity could create opportunities for the provisions to be applied beyond genuinely sensitive security matters, including against ordinary citizens, political opponents or people taking part in protests.
The commission has acknowledged that the state has a legitimate duty to protect judges, investigators and other officials who face credible threats. However, it has questioned whether the government has demonstrated a compelling need for such extensive secrecy.
The HRCP stated that the legislation raises constitutional questions, particularly in relation to Articles 9, 10A and 14. These provisions concern the security of individuals, the right to a fair trial and the protection of human dignity. The Commission has also referred to Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which guarantees fundamental fair-trial protections, as highlighted by Dawn.
The HRCP stated that concealing the identities of important participants in criminal proceedings could seriously affect defendants. A person facing a wrongful accusation could find it more difficult to scrutinise evidence, challenge the prosecution or determine whether proceedings are being conducted impartially, as reported by Dawn. (ANI)
Related reading
