Anti-Terrorism Laws.

Almost everyone agrees that terrorism must be eradicated, but many groups criticize the route taken to accomplish this. One school of thought believes the war against terrorism itself is terrorism. Alternatively, some debate the necessity of harsh measures while others push for addressing the root cause to nip the evil in bud.

Dissenting views are essential to maintain balance in any society. This agreement to disagree can even be seen at the highest levels of the United Nations. Despite the zero-tolerance policy of the UN Office of Counter terrorism, the Human Rights Committee is ever concerned about the Anti-Terrorism Act's (ATA) extensive powers. Occasionally reviewing laws that criminalized terrorism would be prudent before joining either pressure group. It is true that various sections of the law penalize war against the country, sedition, and mutiny, which are the basic components of terrorism; however, its inherent nature is largely lacking for the ever-mutating nature of terrorist activity.

As a result of sectarian conflicts and target killings during the late 70s and early 90s, the country was plunged into a deep swamp of instability and violence. Along with other supplementary laws, the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act 1975 and the Terrorist Affected Areas (Special Courts) Ordinance 1990 were passed. In contrast, our chronic problem has been the careless way in which laws have been implemented. The ATA was Pakistan's primary legislation dealing with terrorism in this context. Through various Ordinances or Acts, provisions of the said law have been regularly amended or added.

In the post 9/11 world, a variety of laws were needed to ensure uniform transnational anti-terrorism policies, one of which was terror financing. The Fourth Schedule of the ATA was amended in 2001 to curb financial support for terrorism. Several amendments were made to the law in 2013 and 2014 to further clamp down on terror financing. Earlier to these amendments, special laws aimed at curtailing money laundering were introduced in 2007 and 2010. Although Pakistan has taken early steps to improve its financial situation, one wonders why the Paris-based watchdog 'Financial Action Task Force' placed it on the 'Grey List'. Maybe having a law is one thing, and unyieldingly enforcing it is another! It must be admitted that the blame cannot be pinned entirely on the legislature, executive, or judiciary. It was practically impossible for the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT