(New York)— As a Pakistani anti-terrorism court prepared to hear the case against deposed Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Human Rights Watch urged that the legislation creating the courts be amended and that the trial be conducted in full accordance with international fair trial standards.
"In its current form, the anti-terrorism law infringes on civil liberties and due process of law," said Mike Jendrzejczyk, Washington director of Human Rights Watch's Asia division. Noting that the courts had been used selectively against political opponents by both the Sharif administration and the current military government, he added: "The trial of Prime Minister Sharif gives the international community the chance to scrutinize the use of these courts, which sacrifice due process in the interest of speedy trials."
Sharif, who was removed from office by the Pakistani military on Oct. 12, has been charged along with four other defendants with criminal conspiracy, attempted murder, hijacking, kidnaping, and terrorism. The charges stem from events on the day of the coup, when a civilian plane carrying army chief of staff General Pervez Musharraf and some 200 other passengers was prevented from landing at Karachi's airport, allegedly on Sharif's orders. Sharif and his co-defendants could be sentenced to life in prison or death if convicted.
The Anti-Terrorism Act, which was passed by the parliament on August 16, 1997 and amended by an ordinance of the federal government on April 29, 1999, provides for the establishment of anti-terrorism courts to try persons charged with committing terrorist acts, and stipulates special procedures for the conduct of their trials. Under the Sharif administration, the courts were used against sectarian parties in Punjab province and the Muttahida Qaumi Movement in Sindh province, which draws support among Sindh's Urdu-speaking population.
Courts established under the act are to conduct trials within seven days. Convicted persons have only seven days in which to file appeals, and these too must be heard and decided within a seven-day period. These provisions contravene international human rights principles of due process, including the right to adequate time and facilities for the preparation of a defense, Human Rights Watch said. Pakistan's constitution, which was suspended by the military government following the coup, enshrines fundamental principles of due process as well.
As defined under the law, terrorist acts include causing "civil commotion"— a term that is defined so broadly as to violate fundamental rights of free expression and assembly. Civil commotion includes the "commencement or continuation of illegal strikes" as well as "distributing, publishing or pasting of a handbill or making graffiti or wall-chalking intended to create unrest or fear." This provision has come under legal attack for its inconsistency with the Pakistan's constitution. Pakistan's Supreme Court announced Nov. 16 that it would issue guidelines governing its application. Although noting that guidelines would be an improvement, Human Rights Watch called for the repeal of the provision. The rights group also urged the repeal of the act's provisions restricting the time available for the preparation of a defense to criminal charges.
For Further Information:
Vikram Parekh (w) 212 216 237
Mike Jendrzejczyk (DC) +1 202 612 4341 (w)
