ISLAMABAD – A meeting of the superior courts’ judges Saturday determined that inadequate protection to witnesses, investigators and presiding officers of the trial courts is the major hurdle in effective implementation of Anti Terrorism Act 1997.
The meeting was attended by senior judges of Supreme Court, monitoring judges of provincial High Courts and top police and prosecution officials of all provinces. Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, who presided over the meeting, showed concern at the high rate of acquittal in cases being heard at anti-terrorism courts (ATCs) of the country.
The participants noted that the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) is a special law designed to tackle the issue of terrorism. The law also contains fairly stringent provisions to combat the menace of terrorism and this law has also been given overriding effect. However there has been no visible improvement in combating terrorism and stopping sectarian violence and commission of heinous offences.
The meeting stressed the need to find the problems faced by the courts in expeditiously deciding the cases, by prosecutors in securing convections and the investigators in collecting and presenting before the court sufficient material and evidence to punish the culprits.
This law, the participants noted, has some provisions to protect the judges, counsels, public prosecutors, witnesses and other persons concerned with court proceedings. They especially discussed Article 21 of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 that deals with the protection to all those concerned with the trials at the ATCs.
The meeting noted that because of improper provision of security the witnesses usually avoid coming forward to depose against the culprits especially in the cases of terrorism and sectarian killings. If the witnesses are fully protected, they will not feel any fear and would be coming forward for deposing.
As the cases in the ATCs are mostly related to hardened criminals, so the witnesses need special care and protection. The meeting also took notice of a case in Sindh wherein six witnesses were assassinated in a row and expressed concern on such negligence that if such incidents persists no one will come forward to record evidence.
The meeting also discussed the backlog of cases at the ATCs and noted that this is partly due to delay in appointment of judges. Islamabad, the federal capital, where there is good number of Anti Terrorism Cases, has no ATC. Presently, the terrorism cases of Islamabad are being heard at Rawalpindi courts. The meeting proposed that initially two courts may be established to deal with the cases of Islamabad along with all necessary infrastructure, staff and prosecutors etc.
It was informed that there are 14 ATCs in Punjab, 11 in Sindh, 13 in KP and 6 in Balochistan. The disposal and pendency figure for 2012 of ATC courts is as: Punjab decided 1344 cases, pending 437; Sindh 459 decided, 1,405 pending; Khyber Pukhtunkhwa 1,409 decided, 201 pending; and Balochistan 289 decided, 216 pending.
The meeting also examined the data pertaining to disposal of cases during last ten years (2002 to 2012) and showed concern over the high rate of acquittal in ATC cases. The chief justice said the rate of acquittal in ATC cases is alarmingly high and stressed at taking measures to effectively prosecute the ATC case in all the provinces.
It was noted that as per a report compiled by the Punjab Prosecution Department, the high rate of acquittal was mainly due to defective or dishonest investigation and weaknesses in prosecution.
The meeting observed that such defects and deficiency must immediately be addressed by the respective provincial government and necessary training be imparted to investigators and prosecutors, besides provision of requisite equipment including forensic labs.
The IGPs made their presentations regarding the causes of delay which are mostly due to defects in registration of cases, non-availability of eye-witnesses, no description of accused, role of accused not specified, material evidence not mentioned, delay in FIR registration, defects in investigation, defects in identification parade, doubtful recovery, etc.
It was also discussed that meetings of stakeholders in each province under the chairmanship of monitoring Judges of the respective High Courts should be convened as soon as possible to formulate strategies and to resolve issues. The Provincial Government can also make legislation or at least tentative legislation for geo fencing and data collecting of mobile phone from the respective service providers.
The meeting was attended by Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali; and monitoring judges of provincial High Courts Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik (Punjab), Justice Sajjad Ali Shah (Sindh), Justice Mian Fasihul Mulk (Peshawar) and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail (Balochistan). Besides them, Registrar Supreme Court, Home Secretaries, IGPs, Additional IGPs, Secretaries Prosecutions and Prosecutors General of all provinces and IG Islamabad also attended the meeting.