Punjab PA opposition urges governor to withhold assent to anti-terrorism bill
LAHORE: Opposition Leader in the Punjab Assembly Muhammad Moin-ud-Din Riaz and the Judicial Activism Panel have urged the Punjab governor to withhold assent to the recently-passed Anti-Terrorism Amendment Bill 2026 and return it to the provincial assembly for reconsideration, raising serious constitutional and legal objections to several provisions of the legislation.
In a letter addressed to the Punjab governor, the opposition and other stakeholders requested that the bill be sent back to the assembly under Article 116(2)(b) of the Constitution for a fresh review and meaningful debate.
The Anti-Terrorism Amendment Bill 2026 was passed by the Punjab Assembly on August 31 amid a complete opposition walkout. The letter pointed out the opposition was denied an opportunity for meaningful debate on legislation that could have far-reaching implications for fundamental rights, including liberty, dignity and the right to a fair trial.
The request submitted by the Judicial Activism Panel was also endorsed by Opposition Leader Muhammad Moin-ud-Din Riaz, MPA Chaudhry Ijaz Shafi and other stakeholders.
The applicants argued that provisions relating to concealing the identities of judges were potentially inconsistent with Articles 4, 9, 10-A, 14 and 25 of the Constitution. They maintained that measures intended to protect judges and witnesses could be justified on security grounds, but such measures should remain limited, subject to judicial oversight and consistent with constitutional safeguards.
The letter also questioned whether the Punjab Assembly had the legislative competence to amend the Anti-Terrorism Act, given that the Anti-Terrorism Act is federal legislation. The applicants called for a legal opinion on the potential conflict between federal and provincial legislation under Article 143 of the Constitution before the bill is allowed to become law.
They stressed that security concerns could not justify deviation from constitutional guarantees, arguing that trials must be conducted by independent and impartial courts.
The applicants further contended that secret trials and anonymous judgments could undermine constitutional protections and conflict with Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which guarantees the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal.
They further said they supported appropriate protection for judges and witnesses, but maintained that any such measures should be narrowly tailored and implemented under the supervision of courts rather than through provisions that could compromise transparency and due process.
The letter urged the governor to return the bill to the assembly, seek a formal opinion on its constitutional and legislative competence, and facilitate a fresh review involving representatives of all political parties. It also called for safeguards against convictions based solely on anonymous testimony and urged that the Lahore High Court’s constitutional jurisdiction remain intact.
The applicants warned that if the bill was enacted in its present form or with substantially similar provisions, they would approach the Lahore High Court and the Supreme Court to challenge its legality and constitutionality.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2026