The fact is that both the criminal and civil justice systems need reforms without any further loss of time. The fact is that between 2010 and 2018 the Supreme Court overturned no less than 78% decisions in which capital punishment had earlier been awarded — acquitting the accused, commuting the sentence or sending cases for review. The fact is also that governments are yet to realise the urgency of effecting the much-needed reforms, though even the PM has emphasised the need to reform the criminal justice system. But the fact is that governments have developed cold feet on such a significant issue, which is a question of life and death for many, and causes prolonged anxiety to their families due to the agonising delay involved in deciding cases.
A human rights organistion has drawn the attention of the Sindh CM and other provincial government high-ups to the inordinate delay in implementing the Sindh (Revival of Police Order 2002) (Amendment) Act 2019. The rights group has called for making the provincial Public Safety and Police Complaints Commission and its district chapters functional. In a letter to the CM, it has listed issues like delays in holding regular meetings, official members’ absence from these meetings, establishing a secretariat and allocation of resources. It says though they had submitted reports on several fake encounters and cases of police excesses, the relevant quarters had not responded. Is it because the authorities have vested interests in dilly-dallying over the issue?
The afore-mentioned enactment empowers the Police Commission to recommend updating of laws relating to the functioning of police, prosecution, prisons, etc. It can recommend reform of the criminal justice system and take cognisance of abuse of authority by the police. The commission is to recommend prison reforms. At present prisons are reportedly dark dungeons for poor prisoners. Bribery is allegedly rampant there. All this calls for urgent prison reforms.
LoC truce deal
In a positive development as regards the eastern border, Pakistan and India have agreed to a ceasefire. A joint statement issued on Thursday credited the Directors General of Military Operations of the two countries with reaching the deal. The statement says that both sides will work to strictly observe all existing agreements and understandings relating to the Line of Control in Kashmir and the established border.
The deal was long-awaited. According to ISPR, there have been over 13,500 ceasefire violations since 2003 which have cost 310 civilian lives and led to over 1,600 injured. Those numbers have spiked since 2014, with 92 per cent of the casualties occurring since then. That is not a coincidence. The far-right government of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was first elected in 2014. Since taking power, Modi has repeatedly rebuffed efforts to resolve any disputes with Pakistan and has instead tried to blame all of his own governance failures on Islamabad.
Even though casualty numbers fell after 2018 — the peak year — total violations actually went up in 2019, and the only reason they fell remarkably in 2020 was the Covid-19 pandemic. But despite the pandemic, India still committed more than 2,900 ceasefire violations in 2020, resulting in the martyrdom of at least 33 civilians and injuries to 260 others. One of those ceasefire violations even targeted UN military observers. Still, the agreement is a win for both countries and shows the importance of keeping lines of communication open even when relations are tense.
One unusual development, however, was the outright denial that any government-level backchannel diplomacy was involved in reaching the ceasefire. While many countries will downplay or refuse to confirm if backchannel talks were involved in any diplomatic or military agreements, it was odd how hotline talks between the DGMOs were repeatedly emphasised by the government and reports of backchannel talks were continually denied.
Some may actually see it as concerning because the denial implies that backchannel talks are either not yielding any fruit or, even worse, are not even being attempted. This is because any eventual permanent resolution of the Kashmir issue would be diplomatic, rather than military
