Application Of Death Penalty In Pakistan: Case Studies
The application of the death penalty in Pakistan has been a subject of intense debate due to its controversial nature and the country’s fluctuating stance on capital punishment. Pakistan has a complex legal framework regarding the death penalty, influenced by Islamic law, constitutional provisions, and international human rights standards. The Supreme Court of Pakistan and other courts have ruled on several high-profile cases involving the death penalty, shaping its application in the country.
Here are several landmark case studies related to the death penalty in Pakistan, which shed light on how the courts have interpreted and applied capital punishment.
1. The Case of Mumtaz Qadri (2016)
Facts of the Case:
Mumtaz Qadri, a police constable, assassinated Salman Taseer, the Governor of Punjab, in 2011. Qadri justified his action by claiming that Taseer had blasphemed against Islam for advocating the reform of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws. He shot Taseer dead in broad daylight, and during his trial, Qadri openly admitted to the killing, but he claimed it was in defense of the Prophet Muhammad's honor. He was convicted under Section 302 (murder) of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) and sentenced to death.
Outcome:
Qadri was sentenced to death by the Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) in 2011. However, his case became a highly controversial one, as many religious extremists celebrated his actions and even viewed him as a martyr. In 2015, the Lahore High Court (LHC) upheld the death sentence despite significant protests from religious groups and calls for his execution to be pardoned.
In 2016, after a lengthy legal battle, the Supreme Court of Pakistan dismissed Qadri's appeal for clemency, and he was executed by hanging.
Significance:
The case of Mumtaz Qadri became a symbol of the tension between Pakistan’s blasphemy laws and the death penalty. It sparked national debates about the misuse of blasphemy laws, the role of religion in politics, and the issue of extrajudicial killings. The execution of Qadri raised questions about the role of the state in controlling vigilante justice and the protection of individuals’ rights to life.
2. Shafqat Hussain v. Pakistan (2015)
Facts of the Case:
Shafqat Hussain was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of a child in 2004. However, his case became controversial when it was revealed that he had been a minor at the time of the crime. Hussain's legal team argued that he was just 14 years old at the time of the offense and thus should not have been subjected to the death penalty under both national and international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which Pakistan had ratified.
Despite claims of his age and the lack of conclusive evidence, Hussain’s appeal for clemency was rejected, and he was executed in 2015.
Outcome:
The Supreme Court of Pakistan did not intervene, and Shafqat Hussain was executed by hanging. This case raised serious concerns about the execution of minors, as Pakistan is a signatory to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which prohibits the death penalty for minors.
Significance:
This case brought attention to Pakistan’s legal and ethical obligations regarding minors and the death penalty. It prompted international human rights organizations to criticize Pakistan’s failure to comply with international conventions protecting children from capital punishment. The case underscored the lack of due process in some death penalty cases, where the age of the accused could be easily disputed or ignored.
3. The Case of Aasia Bibi (2018)
Facts of the Case:
Aasia Bibi, a Christian woman, was accused of committing blasphemy in 2009 after a dispute with her Muslim colleagues. She was charged with blasphemy under Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code, which mandates a death sentence for anyone found guilty of insulting the Prophet Muhammad. Bibi’s case gained international attention, as many argued that her conviction was based on false accusations and religious intolerance.
After a trial, Aasia Bibi was sentenced to death by hanging in 2010, but her case was appealed. The case involved various political and religious pressures, and extremist groups demanded her execution. However, after years of legal proceedings, including numerous attempts by her legal team to seek clemency, the Supreme Court of Pakistan acquitted her in 2018.
Outcome:
The Supreme Court of Pakistan, in a historic ruling, overturned Aasia Bibi’s death sentence, citing insufficient evidence against her and the flawed application of blasphemy laws. The decision was met with widespread protests from hardline Islamist groups, who demanded her execution. Despite this, Aasia Bibi was eventually allowed to leave Pakistan after a prolonged period of safety concerns, and she sought asylum abroad.
Significance:
This case highlighted the misuse of blasphemy laws in Pakistan, where accusations of blasphemy can lead to death sentences without sufficient evidence. The ruling of Aasia Bibi’s acquittal was a significant moment in the debate about the death penalty, religious extremism, and the justice system in Pakistan. It also demonstrated the challenges of judicial independence in a climate of political and religious pressure.
4. The Case of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (1979)
Facts of the Case:
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the former Prime Minister of Pakistan, was convicted for the murder of Nawab Mohammad Ahmad Khan Kasuri, a political opponent. Bhutto’s trial was politically charged, and the fairness of the trial was questioned, as it was alleged that the trial was influenced by the military regime under General Zia-ul-Haq, who had taken power in a coup against Bhutto’s government.
Bhutto was sentenced to death by hanging in 1979, and despite international appeals for clemency, he was executed on April 4, 1979. His execution sparked worldwide condemnation, with many arguing that it was politically motivated and that Bhutto did not receive a fair trial.
Outcome:
Despite appeals from foreign governments, including the United States, the execution of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was carried out by hanging, under orders from General Zia-ul-Haq. Bhutto’s death marked a significant moment in Pakistan’s history, as it represented the use of capital punishment for political purposes.
Significance:
Bhutto’s execution is considered one of the most controversial events in Pakistan's modern history. It led to questions about the legitimacy of the military dictatorship and the use of the death penalty for political purposes. The case is often cited in debates about the misuse of capital punishment in politically motivated trials.
5. The Case of Sarfraz Shah (2011)
Facts of the Case:
Sarfraz Shah, a young man, was shot and killed by members of the Rangers, a paramilitary force, in Karachi. Shah was accused of stealing a wallet, and despite not being armed, he was shot by the Rangers while being detained in public. The incident was captured on video and widely circulated, sparking public outrage. Shah was not given a fair trial, and the officers involved in his death were charged with murder, which could potentially carry a death penalty.
Outcome:
The case was taken to court, and in 2012, five Rangers officers were sentenced to death for the murder of Sarfraz Shah. This case highlighted the challenges in applying the death penalty when law enforcement agencies themselves are involved in extrajudicial killings.
Significance:
The Sarfraz Shah case brought attention to extrajudicial killings and the abuse of state power. It demonstrated how the death penalty can be used in cases where individuals or groups abuse their power. The case also raised questions about the effectiveness of law enforcement and the need for accountability in cases of state violence.
6. The Case of Khalid Mehmood (2007)
Facts of the Case:
Khalid Mehmood was convicted for the murder of his former employer. The case involved a dispute over a work-related matter, and after an argument, Mehmood killed his employer and was subsequently charged with murder under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The case was a typical example of personal retribution leading to a death penalty sentence.
Outcome:
Mehmood was convicted in a lower court and sentenced to death by hanging. However, in a notable development, his family reached a compromise with the victim’s family through the Islamic law of diyat (blood money), and the victim’s family pardoned Mehmood. As a result, the court commuted his death sentence, reflecting Pakistan’s reliance on Islamic principles of justice, which allow for victims or their families to forgive the accused or accept compensation in lieu of capital punishment.
Significance:
This case illustrates the role of Islamic law and the concept of blood money in mitigating the application of the death penalty in Pakistan. It demonstrates how the Islamic concept of forgiveness can alter the course of capital punishment cases and offers a contrasting example to the automatic application of the death penalty.
Conclusion
The application of the death penalty in Pakistan is influenced by a complex combination of Islamic law, constitutional provisions, and international human rights obligations. The cases discussed above show how the death penalty has been applied across various types of crimes, including blasphemy, murder, political disputes, and extrajudicial killings. These cases also reveal the inherent tensions between the death penalty and the need for fair trials, human rights, and political influences. As Pakistan continues to grapple with these issues, its approach to the death penalty will likely continue to evolve in response to both domestic and international pressures.
RELATED Blog
0 comments