Punjab passes secret terrorism trial law, sparking major controversy

The Punjab provincial assembly, in Pakistan's most populous province, has passed a law allowing terrorism trials to be conducted in near-total secrecy, with judges, prosecutors, and witnesses potentially remaining anonymous. Under the new law, a person facing the most serious criminal charges could be convicted without knowing who judged, prosecuted, or testified against them.

The bill amending the Punjab Anti-Terrorism Act 2026 was passed by the Punjab Assembly on August 31, after opposition lawmakers walked out in protest. Four days earlier, the government had appeared to make concessions by agreeing to review the bill, but when it returned, the bill was unchanged and passed without any amendments.

The new law grants a senior official, designated as the “appointing authority,” the power to decide which cases are tried under special provisions. The identity of this official is kept secret, known only to the Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court. This official can declare any terrorism case a “special security case” if they believe those involved require special “protection.”

The law does not specify clear criteria to be met, and the accused cannot appeal being placed in this category. After the official's request, the Chief Justice will designate an anti-terrorism court judge. A panel of five prosecutors is formed, and the official will choose one. From then on, the identities of the judge, prosecutor, police, witnesses, and defense lawyers are not disclosed under any circumstances.

The Punjab government justifies the law as a response to the increasing attacks by armed groups and the growing threat to judges, prosecutors, investigators, and witnesses. However, critics argue that the law concentrates too much power in an unnamed official and could be used against government critics.

Constitutional lawyer Rida Hosain in Lahore acknowledges that the threat to judges and witnesses in Pakistan is real, but emphasizes that no one reading the amendment carefully could argue it complies with fair trial procedures. She warns: “By introducing anonymous courts, the accused is deprived of the ability to challenge the judge's bias and protect judicial objectivity. While this law remains in effect, the right to a fair trial and due process is effectively suspended in Punjab.”

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) also voiced criticism, stating that the bill “does not adequately define the circumstances under which this special power may be used,” creating loopholes for abuse against ordinary citizens, political opponents, or protesters in the name of security. Constitutional lawyer Mian Dawood argues that existing law already allows courts to protect witnesses and hold closed sessions under judicial control, whereas the new law shifts that control to the executive branch.

Political analyst Majid Nizami points out that Punjab's original anti-terrorism law from 1997 was also abused, as it was once used to punish most major political parties. He says it is difficult to identify a case in Punjab over the past decade where witness intimidation derailed a prosecution, which is the justification for hiding prosecutors and judges in the new law. However, there are old precedents like the case of militant commander Malik Ishaq, head of Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, who was repeatedly acquitted because witnesses and judges were too fearful.

Notably, Balochistan province passed a similar law in September 2025, allowing an anonymous senior official to designate cases for secret trial. Lawmaker Khalid Mahmood Ranjha, who moved the bill in Punjab, said Balochistan and Sindh “have passed this law” and Punjab needed to follow suit. However, Sindh's amendment only allows the provincial government to change the size or abolish anti-terrorism courts, without similar anonymity or secrecy provisions. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, which along with Balochistan accounts for over 90% of the country's terrorism-related deaths, has not adopted secret trials.

Political analyst Salman Ghani says Punjab's situation differs from Balochistan because Punjab remains largely controllable, and terrorist attacks are not frequent. Opposition lawmaker Ahmer Rasheed Bhatti questioned: “You don't need an anonymous provincial court in a safer province. Unless that anonymity is the purpose.”

A legal challenge is almost certain. Opposition lawmakers argue the law violates the constitutional right to a fair trial and exceeds the provincial assembly's authority, as anti-terrorism legislation falls under federal jurisdiction. The law has no expiry clause, so its fate will likely be determined in court rather than in the assembly that passed it.