Punjab’s New Anti-Terrorism Act Raises Fears of Secret Trials and Abuse of State Power

Human Rights Research Center
3 minutes ago
4 min read

September 08, 2026

HRRC expresses serious concern that Punjab’s new anti-terrorism law could undermine due process and the constitutional right to a fair trial by allowing secret proceedings and excessive executive control. While protecting judges and witnesses is necessary, such measures must be clearly defined, independently reviewed and protected against misuse targeting ordinary citizens, political opponents or protesters.

Border fencing along the Pakistan-Afghanistan international border, located in the arid, mountainous region of Balochistan, Pakistan [Image Credit: Jahanzaib Khan/Pexels]

Punjab, Pakistan’s largest province in terms of population, has passed a controversial amendment to the country’s anti-terrorism law despite protests and a walkout by opposition members in the provincial assembly. Opposition lawmakers labelled the legislation draconian and alleged that it could be used against Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leaders and activists.

The law introduces a new category called a “special security case” for the terrorism-related proceedings in which participants are considered to need extraordinary protection.

A senior provincial government officer of at least Grade 20 (22 is the highest grade of government officer), whose own identity would also remain secret, could classify an individual case or a group of cases as special security cases.

Once a case has been labelled a special security case, the identities of the judge, prosecutor, defence lawyer, police officers, witnesses, and other people involved could be concealed.

Judges would be identified by their official titles rather than their names, witnesses would receive identification codes, and trials could be held at secure locations or through video links, including from prisons.

The provincial government argues that these measures are needed because Pakistan has suffered heavily from terrorism and suspects have sometimes been released because witnesses and judicial officials could not be adequately protected.

However, the law does not clearly define the circumstances in which these exceptional powers may be used, creating the risk that they could be applied to ordinary citizens, political opponents or protesters under the guise of national security.

The secrecy could undermine due process and the constitutional right to a fair trial because an accused person may be unable to verify a judge’s independence, request the judge’s recusal or effectively challenge the evidence and proceedings.

It could also weaken judicial oversight by giving an executive official significant influence over the classification of cases and the appointment of prosecutors.

Although protecting judges and witnesses from genuine threats is legitimate, such measures should be narrowly defined, clearly regulated and subject to independent judicial oversight to prevent arbitrary use of state power.

Glossary

Adequately – in a way that is enough or satisfactory for a particular purpose.
Alleged – to say that someone has done something illegal or wrong without giving proof.
Amendment – a change or changes made to the words of a text.
Arbitrary – based on a desire or idea or chance rather than reason.
Classify – to divide things or people into groups according to their type, or to say which group or type something or someone belongs to.
Concealed – kept hidden or where it cannot easily be seen.
Constitutional right – a right or freedom that people have under a constitution ( the set of political principles by which a state or organization is governed).
Defence Lawyer – Military Lawyer is a legal professional who serves in the armed forces, providing legal support and advice to military personnel.
Draconian – extremely severe, especially of a rule, law, or punishment.
Due Process – a citizen's fair treatment within the rules of a government's legal system.
Executive – someone in a high position, especially in business, who makes decisions and puts them into action.
Legitimate – allowed by law; reasonable and acceptable.
Oversight – systems or actions to control an activity and make sure that it is done correctly and legally.
Pretext – a pretended reason for doing something that is used to hide the real reason.
Proceedings – the actions that are taken in a court of law.
Populous – (of a country, area, or place) having a lot of people living there.
Prosecutor – a legal official who accuses someone of committing a crime, especially in a law court.
Province – one of the areas that a country or empire is divided into as part of the organization of its government, which sometimes has some control over its own laws.
Recusal – the fact of a judge or a member of a jury not being involved in a trial because they have a special interest in its final result.
Secrecy – the state of being secret or of keeping something secret.
Trial – the hearing of statements and showing of objects, etc. in a law court to judge if a person is guilty of a crime or to decide a case or a legal matter.
Undermine – to make someone less confident, less powerful, or less likely to succeed, or to make something weaker, often gradually.
Witnesses – a person who sees an event happening, especially a crime or an accident.

References

HRRC accepts NO funding from governments for our research or campaigns. At every step of the way, our impact is made possible because of people like YOU. Make your contribution now!

Punjab’s New Anti-Terrorism Act Raises Fears of Secret Trials and Abuse of State Power

Recent Posts