Anomalies in the criminal justice system of Pakistan are very common. The example of this could be the recent Supreme Court judgements where it had acquitted two convicts who had already been executed a couple of months agoor had ordered the release of persons who had spent long years on death row. These incidences have become routine matter now. How can one argue for keeping the death penalty in such a criminal justice system? To answer this question, we have to see that recently Pakistan chose to vote against the resolution of the general assembly of the United Nations that called for placing a universal moratorium on the death penalty across the world. The resolution had the backing of 117 member states; 41 opted for voting against it, and 31 abstained. From the recent voting trend, it appears that South Asian countries preferred to reject the universal moratorium resolution while some of the countries of this region such like Sri Lanka, Bhutan and Nepal chose to vote in favour of the resolution. Those who abstained included: Bahrain, Cameroon, Comoros, Djibouti, Indonesia, Jordan, Lebanon, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Uganda and the UAE. Further more, it is noticeable that 57 member states of (OIC) voted in favour of the resolution, while 13 abstained and 18 voted against, meaning thereby Pakistan was among the minority of 18 members of OIC that voted against the resolution. From the factuality it appears that majority member states of OIC opted for favouring universal ban on the death penalty, while a small minority preferred to vote against the universal ban on the death penalty which included countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Libya, Oman, Maldives, Pakistan, Yemen, Syria, etc. It can be encapsulated from the voting trend that the majority of OIC member-countries couldn’t find any faith-based bar or Islamic ground for accepting are solution that called for a universal ban on the death penalty. It is Pakistan, or I must take a name of Bangladesh as well where religious scholars find arguments in support of the hangings. The leading nations of the OIC — one of the biggest forums of Muslim nations — categorically accepted the general assembly resolution, while minority rejected it. It is also noteworthy that the Law Commission of India in August 2015vide its Report No.262recommended for abolition the death penalty for all crimes but keeping it for terrorism-relatedoffences and waging war. Despitethis, India opted for voting against the resolution that called for placing a universal moratorium on the capital punishment. I think India could have abstained from voting against the resolution instead of voting against. Being a human rights activist and a criminal lawyer, I oppose the death penalty for numerous reasons and the uttermost one could be that it is irreversible once a convict is executed. The criminal justice system of Pakistan is so flawed that anything can happen. People may be held liable for a guilty of the capital punishment on the basis of frivolous and concocted evidence. The prosecution in order to prove their case beyond the reasonable doubt may drive the whole crime scene against a person standing trial in connivance with the authorities. It is noted that Pakistan warrants the death penalty for 27 crimes and the number was at two at the time of independence in 1947 — even Islam warrants the capital punishment for only two crimes. The question which needs to be asked from the authorities of Pakistan is how it can defend the death penalty for 27 offences? The judiciary has also expressed that it is bound to pen down the death penalty as a punishment, as it is a part of the criminal justice system in circumstances that demands lesser punishment. It is not out of place to mention that the judiciary is bound by the provisions and law made by the Parliament to follow it in letter and spirit. As long as the death penalty is retained in the criminal justice system of Pakistan, the courts of Pakistan will have to follow it, and it cannot award lesser punishment. In the wake of the Peshawar massacre in 2014,National Action Plan was launched to encounter terrorism and terror-related activities across Pakistan in lieu of which the civilian leadership in consultation with the military leadership, restored the brutal sentencing which was banned in Pakistan by the predecessor government of PPP in 2008. Since 2014, more than 400 convicts had been sent to gallows by the courts but even then, it has noted that the terror related activities and heinous offences in Pakistan had not decreased. This shows that the death penalty is not deterrence to crime at all. An adamant sentiment is to be builtin Pakistan against the abolition of the death penalty. The death penalty is not a social saviour or a way to make a country crime free. The leading nations of Europe, except Belarus, abolished the death penalty years ago, and there the ratio of crime is very low. Even some of American states have started thinking about abolishing the death penalty. Pakistan must consider placing amoratoriumon death penalty so that juveniles or mentally ill persons are saved from this harsh punishment. Even all those 8,000 inmates who are languishing in violent and notorious jails of Pakistan must be given a chance to settle in as civil citizens instead of sending to them to gallows. A death penalty is a brutal form of punishment which has no space in the modernage, and it should be opposed worldwide. The writer is a lawyer based in Lahore, and he can be reached at greenlaw123@hotmail.com