Punjab's New Secret Terrorism Trials Law Sparks Outrage and Legal Concerns in Pakistan

Politicians in Punjab, Pakistan’s most populous province, have passed a controversial law allowing terrorism trials to be conducted in near-total secrecy, permitting the judge, prosecutor, and witnesses to remain completely anonymous. Under the newly enacted Anti-Terrorism (Punjab Amendment) Bill 2026, individuals facing severe criminal charges could be convicted without knowing who heard their case, prosecuted it, or testified against them. The legislation also allows trial records to be sealed, with appeals reviewed by judges who may never know who presided over the original proceedings.

The bill passed the Punjab Assembly on August 31, 2026, following a walkout by opposition politicians. Despite earlier indications that the government would have the bill reviewed by the law department or a parliamentary committee, it returned to the floor unchanged and was passed without amendment. The law has drawn sharp criticism from opposition politicians, lawyers, rights groups, and analysts who argue it concentrates excessive power in a single unnamed official and could potentially target government critics.

Under the new legislation, the government can appoint a senior bureaucrat as a "designated authority" to decide which cases are handled through these special provisions. The official's identity remains confidential, known only to the chief justice of the Lahore High Court, and they can declare any terrorism case or category of cases a "special security case" if they deem special protection necessary. The law lacks clear parameters for these designations, and defendants cannot contest being placed in this category. Once requested, the chief justice assigns the case to a sitting anti-terrorism court judge, and a panel of five public prosecutors is established from which the official picks one.

Consequently, the identities of the judge, prosecutor, police officers, witnesses, and defense lawyers are entirely concealed. Official titles replace names, court orders are signed anonymously, and witnesses are identified only by codes. Hearings can take place over videolink from prisons with voice-disguising technology, and case files are jointly sealed by the chief justice and the designated authority. The legislation contains no expiry date and permits the government to adopt additional measures as deemed appropriate.

The government's official justification points to rising threats against judges, prosecutors, investigators, and witnesses amid increased attacks by armed groups, arguing that existing laws fail to protect them adequately. Speaker Malik Muhammad Ahmad Khan and legislator Khalid Mahmood Ranjha defended the assembly's actions, dismissing fears of political misuse and asserting the law targets hardened terrorists. However, critics like constitutional lawyer Rida Hosain and independent legislator Ahmer Rasheed Bhatti argue that faceless courts violate constitutional rights to a fair trial, strip away basic due process safeguards, and hand judicial-style powers to an unelected official without proper oversight. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) and analysts like Majid Nizami have similarly expressed concern over the potential for abuse and political maneuvering, pointing out that Punjab accounts for only a small share of Pakistan's terrorism-related deaths compared to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan.