Pakistan jails 13 opposition supporters under new protest law

Pakistani courts sentenced 13 opposition supporters to six months in prison Thursday in the first convictions under a controversial new law that critics say restricts the constitutional right to peaceful protest.

The sentences stem from a November 2024 demonstration by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), marking the inaugural use of the Peaceful Assembly and Public Order (PAPO) Act 2024 that was enacted in September.

Magistrates in Islamabad delivered the verdicts in cases involving supporters who participated in the Nov. 26, 2024 protest in the capital. Eight individuals were sentenced in two cases filed at Ramna Police Station, while five more received prison terms in a related case at Tarnol Police Station.

The rulings have intensified Pakistan's ongoing political crisis, with the PTI denouncing the sentences as "political revenge" and human rights lawyers warning the law creates a "chilling effect" on democratic dissent.

'Blow to rights'

"These convictions represent yet another blow to constitutional and human rights in Pakistan," said lawyer Hassan Niazi. "The Constitution guarantees the right to peaceful protest, subject only to reasonable restrictions. However, the Peaceful Assembly and Public Order Act, 2024, effectively extinguishes this right by granting sweeping, unchecked powers to curtail public demonstrations against the government."

Niazi warned that "these convictions will further deepen the 'chilling effect' on peaceful dissent, just as recent actions under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 have done for free speech."

The lawyer criticized the magistrate's reasoning, saying the order "tries to articulate how the restrictions by the state were reasonable, and even accepts that the state must act proportionately, but then barely spends any time demonstrating how this test is made out beyond making sweeping statements about the PTI's conduct."

PTI's Central Information Department also issued a response, stating: "The recent conduct of the judiciary is not the provision of justice but a demonstration of political revenge. The state of transparency in the court proceedings was such that media representatives were removed from the courtroom before the verdict was announced."

The party called the decision "a disgraceful stain on the credibility of the judiciary," adding: "Here, protesting is a crime, and loving Imran Khan has been made an unforgivable sin."

New powers

The PAPO Act significantly expands government powers to regulate public demonstrations beyond Pakistan's traditional Section 144 provisions, which allow temporary assembly bans in specific areas during emergencies. Critics describe the new law as institutionalizing what were previously exceptional powers.

More than 100 additional individuals connected to the same protest have been declared absconders by the courts, indicating the potential scope of prosecutions under the new legislation.

Former Islamabad Bar President Riasat Ali Azad said the PAPO Act directly violates fundamental constitutional rights by requiring prior permission from District Commissioners for political rallies and processions.

"Articles 15, 16, and 17 - this conflicts with them and is contrary to them because this is a constitutional and fundamental right of any citizen, of any group, that they exercise freedom of movement, they exercise freedom of assembly, they exercise freedom of association," Azad said.

He predicted the law would be overturned if challenged, calling it unconstitutional despite being formally enacted. "I believe that this law that has been made has no constitutional status at all, even though an act has been made," Azad said.

The former bar president accused lawmakers of "malafide intentions," saying: "This law is based on bad faith, it has been made with malafide intentions, it has been made to victimize a political party, and this same law will also become a noose around the neck of political parties that will remain in this government in the future."

Niazi echoed concerns about constitutional challenges, saying: "One can only hope that courts will ultimately strike down such laws for their blatant disregard of constitutional protections."