Bill envisages substitution of section 11EEE of ATA with new section.
Proposed changes seek to allow preventive detention of suspects.
LEAs to be empowered for more effective anti-terrorism operations.
ISLAMABAD: The government has proposed authorising the Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs), armed forces, and civil armed forces to detain individuals for up-to three months through an amendment bill introduced in the National Assembly.
Federal Minister for Law and Justice Azam Nazeer Tarar presented the Anti-Terrorism (Amendment) Bill 2024 in the lower house of parliament on behalf of Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi on Friday, The News reported.
The bill would envisage the substitution of section 11EEE of the Anti-Terrorist Act 1997 with a new amended section.
According to the substitution of section 11EEE in the introduced bill, the government, the armed forces or civil armed forces on receiving credible information or a reasonable suspicion exists against a person, may issue detention orders for three months.
“The current security situation requires a robust response that goes beyond the existing legal framework and therefore, the amendment in section 11EEE is required to be inserted to empower government, civil and armed forces or armed forces to detain an individual who poses a significant threat to national security,” the statement of objects and reasons of the proposed legislation said.
This provision would allow for the preventive detention of suspects based on credible information or reasonable suspicion, thereby, disrupting terrorist plots before they can be executed.
This will also provide law enforcement agencies with the legal backing to conduct more effective operations against terrorism. It would facilitate the use of Joint Investigation Teams (JITS), composed of members from various law enforcement and intelligence agencies to conduct comprehensive inquiries and gather actionable intelligence.
The substituted section says that “the government or, where the provisions of Section 4 have been invoked, the armed forces or civil armed forces, as the case may be, subject to the specific or general order of the government in this regard, for a period not exceeding three months and after recording reasons thereof, issue order for the preventive detention of any person, who has been concerned in any offense under this Act relating to the security or defence of Pakistan or any part thereof, or public order relating to target killing, kidnapping for ransom, and extortion, bhatta, or the maintenance of supplies or services, or against whom a reasonable complaint has been made or credible information has been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists of his having been so concerned for purpose of inquiry”.
Under the section 4 of the Anti-Terrorist Act 1997, it would be lawful for the federal government to order, for the provincial government to secure, the presence of armed forces and civil armed forces in any area for the prevention and punishment of terrorist acts and scheduled offenses in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
The substituted section also says that the detention of such person including detention for further period after three months, would be subject to the provision of Article 10 of the Constitution, which provides for safeguarding fundamental right.
The Article 10 says: “No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest, nor shall he be denied the right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice.”
Every person who is arrested and detained in custody would be produced before a magistrate within a period of 24 hours of such arrest. It may be mentioned that similar amendment in the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 was made in 2014, which was also subject to sunset clause and expired after two years.
Separately, Law Minister Tarar laid ‘The Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) (Amendment) Ordinance 2024’ in the Senate, seeking to change the composition of the committee that forms benches and fixes cases under the original Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023, which originally consisted of the chief justice and two senior-most judges of the court.
However, now it will consist of the chief justice, the next most senior judge, and a judge named by the chief justice.
President Asif Ali Zardari had promulgated the ordinance in September. The deputy chairman, chairing the sitting, referred the ordinance to the standing committee concerned.
One of the proposed amendments reads, “Every cause, appeal or matter before the Supreme Court shall be heard and disposed of by a bench constituted by the committee comprising the Chief Justice of Pakistan, the next most senior judge of the Supreme Court and a judge of the Supreme Court nominated by the Chief Justice of Pakistan, from time to time.”
Another significant change is also proposed to be introduced in the handling of cases under Section 184(3) of the Constitution: The amendment would make it mandatory to document why a particular case is considered a matter of public importance before it is taken up by the court.
A formal order, under the proposed amendment must clarify whether the case pertains to public interest or involves human rights issues.
Amendment of section 3, Act XVII of 2023.-In the said Act, in section 3, the existing provision thereof shall be numbered as sub-section (1) and after sub-section (1), numbered as aforesaid, the following new sub-section (2) shall be added, namely: A Bench hearing a matter under clause(3) of Article 184 of the Constitution shall, before proceeding with the matter on merits, decide and identify through a reasoned and speaking order the question of public importance involved in the matter and the fundamental right which is sought to be enforced.
The proposed law also seeks to take away the power of the apex court to take up a case for hearing out of turn.
“Unless a transparent criterion is already mentioned or the applicable law requires a decision within a stipulated time, every cause, matter or appeal in the Supreme Court shall be heard at its turn based on first in, first out, that is to say, the cases flied first shall be heard first. Any Bench hearing a case out of its turn shall record its reasons for doing so, another proposed amendment reads.
Under another proposed amendment hearing of every case, matter or appeal in the Supreme Court shall be recorded and a transcript thereof duly prepared. Such recordings and transcripts shall be made available to the public.
Meanwhile, the Senate Standing Committee on Law and Justice approved increasing the number of judges in the Supreme Court to 25 with a majority vote.
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) Hamid Khan and Kamran Murtaza of Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) opposed the bill.
The bill was moved by Senator Mohammad Abdul Qadir and titled “The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) (Amendment) Bill 2024.”
The committee met under its Chairman Senator Farooq H Naek here at the Parliament House on Friday.
Originally, the bill proposed an increase of four judges in the Superior Court; however, the committee recommended that the number of judges of the Supreme Court should be increased to 25, including the chief justice.
Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Senator Shahadat Awan said that the minimum number of judges in the Supreme Court should be 21.
Senator Mohammad Abdul Qadir stated that around 60,000 cases are pending in the Supreme Court, and the growing population demands that the number of judges be increased so that people can get timely resolution and the pendency of cases can be reduced.
Senator Hamid opined that the resolution of cases is synced with the management of the court. In the last two tenures, he said it was observed that the cause list exhausted even before 11am.
“The separation of powers demands that the Supreme Court be consulted on the matter,” he said.
Senator Murtaza said the new chief justice has come by everyone’s choice, he should be given two to three months to examine whether the issue relates to the number of judges or is wholly a management issue.
Later, despite the JUI-F and PTI opposition, the committee gave its approval to increase the number of Supreme Court judges to 25 with a majority vote.
Furthermore, the committee passed the bill titled “The Legal Aid and Justice Authority (Amendment) Bill 2024” with a majority vote. However, Senator Khalil Tahir dissented on the bill.
Secretary for Law and Justice Raja Naeem Akbar apprised the forum that the bill aims to put the ‘Legal Aid and Justice Authority’ under the administrative control of the Ministry of Law and Justice. Previously, it was administered by the Human Rights Ministry.
While discussing the bill titled “The Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2024” (Substitution of Article 140A and amendment of Article 160), the committee recommended that Article 140 concerns the provinces and the opinion of the provinces would be beneficial in this regard.
The committee decided to write a letter to the provinces for their input on the subject matter.
In attendance were senators Syed Ali Zafar, Anusha Rehman, Shahadat Awan, Kamran Murtaza, Khalil Tahir, Mohammad Abdul Qadir, Zamir Hussain Ghumro, Hamid Khan, Khalid Ateeb, Secretary for Ministry of Law and Justice Raja Naeem Akbar and other senior officials from the ministry.