• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Trending:
  • Kashmir
  • Elections
Friday, June 5, 2026

Daily Times

Your right to know

  • HOME
  • Latest
  • Iran-Israel war
  • Gilgit Baltistan Election
  • Pakistan
    • Balochistan
    • Gilgit Baltistan
    • Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
    • Punjab
    • Sindh
  • World
  • Editorials & Opinions
    • Editorials
    • Op-Eds
    • Commentary / Insight
    • Perspectives
    • Cartoons
    • Letters to the Editor
    • Featured
    • Blogs
      • Pakistan
      • World
      • Lifestyle
      • Culture
      • Sports
  • Business
  • Sports
  • E-PAPER
    • Lahore
    • Islamabad
    • Karachi

Amber Qureshi

Our rampant misuse of death penalty

Published on: June 24, 2017 10:00 PM

June 24, 2017 by Amber Qureshi

 

Pakistan lifted a seven-year moratorium on the death penalty in December 2014, in the wake of the tragic terrorist attacks on the Army Public School in Peshawar. Executions were restored under the pretence that they would only apply to individuals convicted of terrorism related offences. Of course, within a few months, Pakistan lifted the moratorium on all death-eligible crimes.

Terrorism and murder certainly fall under the category of death-eligible crimes; however, nonviolent offences such as adultery, kidnapping, highway robbery, and drug-related offences are also punishable by death. If you’re a member of the Pakistani Army and you show “cowardice” in the presence of any enemy, you could be executed for that offence.

Furthermore, combined with the lack of due process in the Pakistani criminal justice system, many have been wrongfully executed. Pakistan has sentenced juveniles and mentally ill individuals to death despite domestic legislation and international treaties forbidding their execution.

Last year, the Supreme Court acquitted two brothers of murder charges, but it later turned out they had already been executed. Apparently, even dogs are unable to escape the death penalty in Pakistan.

Next month, Pakistan will be reviewed by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, the monitoring body for the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Pakistan is likely to face backlash from the Committee over its use of the death penalty — it will be déjà vu for a country that received a scathing Convention Against Torture review over the same issue earlier this year.

Pursuant to the ICCPR, Pakistan is required to reserve the death penalty for only the most serious crimes — intentional crimes with lethal or other extremely grave consequences. The Human Rights Committee has stated that imposing the death penalty “for offences which cannot be characterized as the most serious, including apostasy, committing a third homosexual act, illicit sex, embezzlement by officials, and theft by force, is incompatible with article 6 of the Covenant.” Therefore, by executing those convicted of lesser offences, Pakistan’s use of the death penalty is in direct violation of the ICCPR.

For this reason, Pakistan’s cruel and unjust death penalty laws continue to face intense scrutiny from the human rights community. The United Nations, the European Union, and many local and international human rights groups around the world have demanded that Pakistan re-impose its moratorium on the death penalty. Despite the calls from these groups, the death penalty still attracts broad support among the Pakistani public. Many cite Islamic or Sharia law as the reason for their support. However, some of the 27 crimes that can receive the death penalty in Pakistan have no support in the Quran or authentic Hadiths; thus, even Sharia law is not a justification for such punishments.

Supporters of the death penalty often use the retributive justice argument to justify executing criminals, i.e. criminals deserve to be executed because we should “take an eye for an eye.” We can set aside the fact that this argument fails for many of the crimes that are eligible to receive the death penalty — no one is arguing that the Pakistani Penal Code should state that the proper punishment is to kidnap a kidnapper or rape a rapist.

Due to the lack of due process in the Pakistani criminal justice system, many have been wrongfully executed. The country has sentenced juveniles and mentally ill individuals to death despite domestic legislation and international treaties forbidding their execution

Despite the inconsistency, this argument is still widely used to justify the executions of murderers. Even then, the retributive justice argument falls apart. If we were really “taking an eye for an eye,” the death sentence would only apply to murderers who arbitrarily chose a victim, told the victim he would murder them at a specified date, confined them in a prison, tortured them mentally and/or physically for eleven years, and then finally murdered them.

No man can inflict such pain; only the state.

If Pakistan is not swayed by the moral argument against capital punishment, it must at least ensure that it is complying with its international commitments. Hundreds of people have been executed in our country as Pakistan has risen in the ranking of countries deemed to be the most prolific executioners in the world. Since lifting the moratorium, Pakistan has abused its power by executing individuals for crimes that breach the holdings of the Human Rights Committee, thereby violating the ICCPR.

The EU has already warned Pakistan that a failure to comply with international conventions could lead to the suspension of Pakistan’s GSP+ status — a preferential tariff system that grants Pakistani products a duty-free access to the European market. As the Human Rights Committee reviews Pakistan’s application of the ICCPR provisions in July, all eyes should be on Pakistan’s violation of its moral and legal responsibilities. Pakistan must bring an end to the misuse of the death penalty and the series of wrongful executions in our country by bringing back the moratorium on the death penalty.

 

The writer is a J.D. student at Yale Law School and a summer intern at Justice Project Pakistan, a human rights law firm in Lahore

 

 

Published in Daily Times, June 25th, 2017.

Filed Under: Op-Ed

Submit a Comment




Primary Sidebar




Latest News

Trump faces rising resistance from fellow Republicans

Trump legal team blocks BBC request in $10bn lawsuit

Xi to visit North Korea as China seeks closer ties

President, Prime Minister praise forces after anti-terror operations in KP

Gilgit-Baltistan election campaign reaches final stretch

Pakistan

President, Prime Minister praise forces after anti-terror operations in KP

Gilgit-Baltistan election campaign reaches final stretch

Pakistan, Iran discuss stronger border security cooperation

Pakistan raised concerns over India’s proposed water infrastructure projects on Chenab River

Maryam Nawaz reaffirmed her govt’s commitment to environmental protection

More Posts from this Category

Business

Oil falls on hopes of broader peace after Lebanon, Israel halt fighting

Meat exports grow by 4.16%

SBP-held foreign reserves rise by $43m to $17.9bn

Gold prices up by Rs 1,523 per tola

Rupee strengthens against dollar

More Posts from this Category

World

Trump faces rising resistance from fellow Republicans

Trump legal team blocks BBC request in $10bn lawsuit

Xi to visit North Korea as China seeks closer ties

More Posts from this Category




Footer

Home
Lead Stories
Latest News
Editor’s Picks

Culture
Life & Style
Featured
Videos

Editorials
OP-EDS
Commentary
Advertise

Cartoons
Letters
Blogs
Privacy Policy

Contact
Company’s Financials
Investor Information
Terms & Conditions

Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
Youtube

© 2026 Daily Times. All rights reserved.

Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.