Politics aside, two fundamental questions arise from a legal perspective.
First: Under international law, does any state have the right to interfere in another state’s judicial system- to influence its courts or use its leverage to suspend or overturn judicial decisions?
Second: Can a citizen of one country lobby foreign parliamentarians against a domestic judicial verdict, encouraging them to use diplomatic, economic, or strategic pressure to influence those decisions? And if a Pakistani citizen engages in such lobbying, what does Pakistani law say? Is it permissible, or is it a serious offence under existing statutes?
Political cases have always been controversial in Pakistan. Political victimisation is not a myth.
To answer these, we turn to the UN Charter. Article 2(1) declares that all states are equal. Not merely equal-sovereignly equal. What does this “sovereign equality” mean? The UN General Assembly’s Resolution 2625, the Friendly Relations Declaration, clarifies: every state is free and sovereign in its internal affairs. Interference by another state constitutes a violation of international law.
This principle is so absolute that even the United Nations itself has no right to interfere in matters within the domestic jurisdiction of a state. Article 2(7) of the Charter explicitly states this. Exceptions exist under Chapter VII, allowing force in extraordinary situations-but that’s an entirely separate matter.
A country’s judicial system falls squarely within its domestic jurisdiction. No foreign power has the legal right to influence another state’s courts or verdicts. Doing so is a breach of international law-unless we are dealing with genocide or crimes against humanity, such as those India commits in Kashmir or Israel in occupied Palestine and Gaza. But under ordinary circumstances, the administration of justice is an internal matter.
Convictions in corruption or criminal cases do not automatically constitute a human rights crisis. Corruption is one issue; human rights violations are another. Criminal penalties exist in every jurisdiction. Even if a justice system is imperfect, that does not give outsiders the right to intervene or apply pressure. If a verdict is flawed, the remedy lies within the legal framework of appeals-not in lobbying foreign legislators to intervene.
Political office or foreign influence does not place anyone above the law. Nor does being a politician mean immunity from conviction. In the United States, former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich was jailed for corruption. Just last year, Senator Robert Menendez was convicted in New Jersey. In Pakistan, too, politicians have been prosecuted and punished. If questions arise, they should indeed be debated. If injustice occurs, it should be remedied-but within the law, not through foreign interference.
International law is explicit: a state using political, economic, or strategic pressure to influence another state’s internal policies is committing illegal intervention. The ICJ’s Nicaragua judgment categorically held that such coercion-whether military, economic, or political-violates international law.
This brings us to the final question: if a Pakistani citizen travels abroad and lobbies foreign parliamentarians to pressure their governments into influencing Pakistan’s domestic policies-does Pakistani law permit this? The legal answer is no. Whether the law is enforced or not, the act itself constitutes an offence. Its gravity would depend on the consequences: if such pressure compromises the economy, that’s one offence; if it undermines national security or strategic interests, it’s another. Moreover, such conduct raises constitutional questions under Articles 62 and 63 about eligibility for parliamentary office. Jurisprudence hasn’t yet addressed these issues, but when it does, the implications will be enormous.
Political cases have always been controversial in Pakistan. Political victimisation is not a myth. But however contentious trials and judgments may be, the solution lies within the Constitution and law-inside Pakistan, not outside it. Unless the Constitution states that Pakistani court decisions require American certification-or that Supreme Court verdicts can be appealed in the U.S. Congress-foreign lobbying against judicial rulings is indefensible.
The writer is a lawyer and author based in Islamabad. He tweets @m_asifmahmood.