In landmark ruling, Pakistan court orders probe into misuse of blasphemy law case

A Pakistani court has ordered the formation of an inquiry commission to investigate allegations that a network of individuals and officials manipulated online content to entrap people in blasphemy cases.

The detailed order of the Islamabad High Court's (IHC) landmark ruling came on Friday. At least 42 hearings were conducted on a constitutional petition filed by families of 101 people accused in various cyber blasphemy cases. The petitioners asked the court to compel the government to act under the Commission of Inquiries Act, 2017.

Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, who issued the detailed order, said the matter was of “definite public importance” and required a full investigation.

He criticized the federal government for ignoring credible evidence from both the National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR) and the Punjab Police’s Special Branch.

The NCHR had interviewed over 90 accused individuals and concluded that the pattern of accusations warranted further scrutiny.

The court made clear it was not ruling on the guilt or innocence of anyone charged with blasphemy. Instead, it found that official reports, testimonies, and other evidence justified an independent inquiry into potential abuse of the law.

What’s the case?

At the center of the case is an alleged entrapment scheme involving FIA officials and private citizens. One individual repeatedly identified is a woman using the alias “Iman,” later revealed as Komal Ismail. According to police records, she contacted multiple individuals online before initiating complaints.

Phone data linked her to Rao Abdul Rahim, a controversial figure described in an intelligence report as a potential ringleader. Despite these links, no serious probe has been launched into the complainants or the origin of the content used as evidence.

The court flagged repeated misuse of Facebook accounts previously confiscated by the FIA. These same accounts, while in agency custody, were used again to initiate new blasphemy cases.

In several instances, mobile phones presented as evidence had already been seized, raising concerns about fabrication or gross mismanagement.

Allegations of bribery

Justice Khan also cited video testimonies during hearings. In one, a father claimed FIA officials demanded bribes in exchange for leniency for his son. In another, private citizens were seen conducting arrests, while official records falsely stated FIA officers made them.

The court dismissed the government’s procedural objections. Officials had argued that only the accused, not their families, had the legal right to file the petition. Justice Khan ruled that families could seek constitutional relief in matters of public interest.

He rejected the use of a Joint Investigation Team (JIT), a common format in Pakistan, saying the case required a more transparent, public forum. He suggested the commission should consider livestreaming proceedings to restore public confidence.

The judgment also referenced custodial deaths, identical complaints filed in different jurisdictions, and a lack of proper forensic analysis. These irregularities, the judge said, justified court oversight.

The federal government has been given 30 days to constitute the commission. It must also set a timeline, preferably not exceeding four months, for completing the inquiry. The court has set a follow-up hearing for Dec. 15.

A turning point?

The ruling could mark a turning point in Pakistan’s controversial use of its blasphemy laws, which international rights groups have long criticized as vague and easily misused.

Accused individuals often face mob violence, prolonged imprisonment, or worse, even before reaching trial.

The judgment has been forwarded to the Cabinet Division, Attorney General, and Advocate General. The court also withdrew contempt notices related to the case and corrected earlier notes that mistakenly indicated the case had concluded.

Justice Khan emphasized that the court would continue supervising compliance.