The political crisis that culminated in the streets of Islamabad in the form of the long march last month looks to be a never-ending saga. Even though for now there appears to be an understanding that the government coalition and the PTI will be battling it out in the polls very soon due to by-elections, the bitterness between the two political factions still seems to be fought through the courts, or executive actions. A Lahore Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) on Friday approved interim bails of top leaders of PTI in Punjab a day after it issued non-bailable arrest warrants for them over multiple charges, including alleged violations of Section 144 and attacks on law enforcement agencies on the day of the long march.
This is highly disappointing and reflects a lack of oversight and maturity by the government. Not only does this strengthen PTI’s claims of political victimisation and a biased government, it is also damaging to the country’s legal system and the framework of our anti-terrorism laws. There have been in recent years, due to FATF’s pressure, many amendments passed to our anti-terrorism laws. These new developments, of terror cases being lodged against political leaders, undermine the whole point of having special courts, especially so when there is a very real threat of terrorism from non-state actors resurging.
The anti-terrorism framework was already flawed—many ordinary cases of theft or murder, while heinous, are not related to the national security aspect that comes with terrorism, but are tried under the ATC anyway. The way it is, the ATC is often misused to impose harsher conditions on convicts of non-terrorism-related crimes. The special procedure ascribed in the ATC, such as denial of bail, extended remand of suspects, preventive detention, enhanced police powers and harsher sentences, was intended only to be applied to terrorist groups, and never to political rivals. It is hoped that this course of action is reversed.
This is highly disappointing and reflects a lack of oversight and maturity by the government. Not only does this strengthen PTI’s claims of political victimisation and a biased government, it is also damaging to the country’s legal system and the framework of our anti-terrorism laws. There have been in recent years, due to FATF’s pressure, many amendments passed to our anti-terrorism laws. These new developments, of terror cases being lodged against political leaders, undermine the whole point of having special courts, especially so when there is a very real threat of terrorism from non-state actors resurging.
The anti-terrorism framework was already flawed—many ordinary cases of theft or murder, while heinous, are not related to the national security aspect that comes with terrorism, but are tried under the ATC anyway. The way it is, the ATC is often misused to impose harsher conditions on convicts of non-terrorism-related crimes. The special procedure ascribed in the ATC, such as denial of bail, extended remand of suspects, preventive detention, enhanced police powers and harsher sentences, was intended only to be applied to terrorist groups, and never to political rivals. It is hoped that this course of action is reversed.
