The Supreme Court has strongly criticised Pakistan’s criminal justice system, ruling that a weak and compromised framework not only undermines the rule of law but also fosters corruption, authoritarianism, and the dominance of the powerful and privileged.
In a detailed 20-page judgment authored by Justice Athar Minallah, while commuting a death sentence to life imprisonment for a man incarcerated for 25 years, the court observed that an effective and responsive criminal justice system, free from political interference and corruption, is a fundamental right of every citizen.
The top court observed that inexpensive and expeditious justice was a commitment of the state under the Constitution.
“The criminal justice system will only serve its purpose when the actual stakeholders, the people of this country, will have trust and confidence in a system which is free, accessible, impartial, responsive, independent, and free from corruption or any other influence.”
“It is, therefore, a constitutional duty of every organ of the State-the executive, judiciary, and the legislature-to take urgent steps so as to ensure that the criminal justice system serves the people of this country and they repose their trust and confidence in its fairness, impartiality, and independence,” the ruling stated.
A three-judge bench of the apex court, led by Justice Minallah, heard the criminal appeal in a decades-old murder case. The appellant had remained behind bars for over 25 years.
While noting the prolonged incarceration, the judgment acknowledged: “The appellant had escaped from judicial custody, and that obviously constitutes a separate offence and, therefore, it would not be appropriate for us to make any observation lest it may prejudice the case of the parties in any matter that may be pending before a competent court/forum.”
The court observed that the appellant was young when the incident occurred in 1991 and had accompanied his father, to whom the motive was primarily attributed. “It cannot be ruled out that the appellant may have acted under the influence of his elders, particularly his father. He did not have any criminal record prior to the occurrence and, therefore, he was a first-time offender.”
It further pointed out that the recovery of the firearm was not beyond doubt, and the evidence on record was not reliable enough to warrant a death sentence. “In addition to these recognised mitigating factors, the appellant has served the full term prescribed for the alternate punishment of imprisonment for life without the benefit of remissions. We are, therefore, of the opinion that on account of these mitigating and extenuating circumstances, the sentence of death on five counts was not justified. We, therefore, partly allow the appeal only to the extent of modifying the sentence of death on five counts to imprisonment for life on five counts. The sentences, except those required to be served in default of payment of compensation, shall run concurrently. The benefit under section 382(b) of Cr.P.C. is extended in favour of the appellant.”
The court went on to express deep concern over the broader dysfunction in the criminal justice system, especially the unjustified delays in processing appeals of death row inmates.