EDITORIAL: On Monday, the Islamabad High Court cleared the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan of terrorism charge as it heard the case in which he was accused of hurling threats at a woman judge and others at a rally that he addressed in the capital last month.
“For reasons to be recorded later on, we declare that Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 is not attracted in the light of the principles and law laid down by the august Supreme Court,” said the order passed by a two-member bench headed by Chief Justice Athar Minallah.
However, the court noted that the case would be now heard for alleged violation of certain sections of Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) by the court of competence jurisdiction. And as the exact words uttered by Imran Khan against the judge and police officials were read out during the hearing Chief Justice Minallah asked if there was a threat of causing physical injury, and if not then in this way “you will open floodgates”. In fact that is already happening, given the loosely-worded anti-terrorism law’s sections that political leaders employ against their rivals – and in some cases with connivance of police in particular.
The Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 is a bad law. It calls for speedy trial of offences as it authorises the scheme of things like denial of bail to terrorism suspect, enhanced police powers, extended remand of suspects and death sentences for certain offences. How badly it has been used a study by the Justice Project Pakistan (JPP) makes a startling case. It says 80 percent persons were sentenced to death under the ATA for offences that bore little connection to terrorism.
And it adds: “It is being employed by police and law enforcement as means to subvert the fundamental rights during arrest, investigation, and trial of non-terrorism suspects”.
The atmospherics of violence and terrorism that prevailed in the 1990s did warrant swift and stiff punishment of terrorists but that is no more the case.
The said law was promulgated to increase the powers of law enforcement agencies to prevent and investigate terrorism cases and create special courts to expedite trial of terrorist suspects. But whatever now happens in terms of violence and threats of violence it is fully covered by the Pakistan Penal Code and should be tried in the ordinary courts of law.
Lingual violence is part of our political culture, and it happens to be favourite pastime in today’s Pakistan. Given testy politicking now in vogue in the country, such unsavoury expressions on the part of politicians are quite common. And they do so at their peril – for it doesn’t furnish the image he may be trying to create about him in the eyes of vox populi. Imran Khan did use certain offensive words against woman judge Zeba Chaudhry and senior police officials, but these didn’t sit well with his political stature. Filled with remorse, Imran Khan has said sorry in the woman judge case. His was a right decision to express repentance. He ought to have done that without any delay.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2022
Comments
Comments are closed.