A fresh fact-finding report by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) has reignited a long-standing and deeply troubling debate in Pakistan.
The report, released from Lahore, accuses the Punjab Police’s Crime Control Department (CCD) of systematically resorting to staged police encounters, resulting in hundreds of deaths outside judicial process. HRCP’s findings raise serious constitutional, legal, and human rights questions—particularly at a time when the state claims to be strengthening rule of law and public safety.
Key Findings: The Scale of the Killings
According to HRCP’s report, at least 670 police encounters were recorded in Punjab during the first eight months of 2025, based on media documentation. These operations reportedly resulted in:
-
924 suspects killed
-
2 police officials dead
The sheer scale of fatalities has alarmed human rights observers, who argue that such numbers cannot be dismissed as isolated incidents or operational coincidence. Instead, HRCP asserts, the data points toward a patterned use of lethal force as policy rather than exception.
Staged Encounters as “Policy,” Not Exception
One of the most damning aspects of the HRCP report is its assertion that staged encounters appear to have been adopted as a matter of policy by the CCD.
From a human rights perspective, this practice undermines:
-
The constitutional right to life
-
Due process protections
-
The presumption of innocence
Extrajudicial killings bypass courts entirely, transferring the power of judge, jury, and executioner to law enforcement officers—a concentration of authority fundamentally incompatible with democratic policing.
Legal Obligations Ignored?
HRCP’s investigative mission identified potential violations of both domestic law and Pakistan’s international human rights commitments.
Under the Torture and Custodial Death (Prevention and Punishment) Act, every custodial death must:
-
Be investigated by the Federal Investigation Agency
-
Occur under the supervision of the National Commission for Human Rights
However, HRCP found no clear evidence that this mandatory legal framework was consistently followed in the cases reviewed. In at least one instance, a court had to intervene and direct the FIA to initiate an investigation—highlighting institutional reluctance rather than automatic compliance.
International Human Rights Implications
Pakistan is a signatory to multiple international conventions, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which strictly prohibits arbitrary deprivation of life.
HRCP argues that unchecked encounter killings place Pakistan at risk of:
-
Violating treaty obligations
-
Facing international scrutiny
-
Weakening its credibility in global human rights forums
This is particularly sensitive at a time when Pakistan seeks economic engagement, development financing, and diplomatic goodwill from international partners.
Punjab Police’s Response: More Resources, Same Strategy?
Despite HRCP’s grave concerns, Punjab Police leadership has signaled a doubling down on the CCD’s operational role.
Punjab Police Inspector General Abdul Kareem announced that additional resources would be allocated to the CCD to help it “achieve its objectives.”
During an introductory briefing, CCD Additional IG Sohail Zafar Chattha emphasized:
-
Use of criminal databases
-
Advanced surveillance and monitoring systems
-
Trackers and modern IT tools
-
Coordination with district police to combat serious crime
While technological modernization is not inherently problematic, HRCP warns that enhanced capacity without accountability risks making lethal abuses more efficient rather than less frequent.
Security vs Rule of Law: A False Choice?
Supporters of aggressive policing often argue that Punjab faces extraordinary criminal challenges requiring extraordinary measures. However, HRCP’s report challenges this narrative by asking a fundamental question:
Can public safety be achieved by suspending the law?
Empirical global research consistently shows that:
-
Extrajudicial killings do not reduce crime sustainably
-
They foster public fear rather than trust
-
They encourage cycles of violence and retaliation
In contrast, lawful investigations, prosecution, and conviction strengthen both security and legitimacy.
Why a Judicial Commission Matters
HRCP’s call for a judicial commission is central to restoring public confidence. Such a commission could:
-
Independently review encounter cases
-
Determine command responsibility
-
Recommend prosecutions or structural reforms
-
Establish transparent operational guidelines
Without independent oversight, internal police inquiries risk becoming procedural formalities rather than mechanisms of justice.
Political Silence and Institutional Risk
Notably, the HRCP report has emerged amid muted political response. This silence itself carries consequences. When elected institutions fail to assert civilian oversight over policing, it:
-
Normalizes lethal shortcuts
-
Weakens parliamentary accountability
-
Sets dangerous precedents for future law enforcement conduct
Unchecked, this trend could erode constitutional governance far beyond Punjab.
A Test Case for Pakistan’s Justice System
The HRCP’s findings on extrajudicial killings by Punjab Police are not merely an indictment of one department—they represent a stress test for Pakistan’s rule of law.
The choice confronting the state is stark:
-
Institutional accountability and legal reform, or
-
Operational expediency at the cost of constitutional collapse
As HRCP warns, security achieved through unlawful killings is not security at all—it is a temporary illusion that leaves deeper wounds in society. Whether Pakistan responds with transparency and reform, or denial and militarization, will shape the country’s human rights trajectory for years to come.
