Punjab Assembly speaker stalls anti-terrorism amendment bill after opposition objections

LAHORE: Punjab Assembly Speaker Malik Muhammad Ahmad Khan halted further discussions on the Anti-Terrorism (Punjab Amendment) Bill 2026 after opposition member Rana Aftab Ahmad Khan raised objections on constitutional and procedural grounds. The bill proposes significant changes to the country's anti-terrorism law, including the creation of a confidential system for terror cases.

This system would allow the identities of judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and witnesses to remain secret during trials. Raising his concerns, PTI's Rana Aftab labeled the bill "unconstitutional" and demanded open and fair trials for terrorism cases. Law Minister Rana Muhammad Iqbal countered that the standing committee had thoroughly examined the bill, and that the opposition should have voiced objections during that stage.

The Anti-Terrorism (Punjab Amendment) Bill 2026 seeks to insert a new Section 21AAA into the existing Anti-Terrorism Act of 1997. This section would establish a "special security case" mechanism for instances where participants are deemed to require exceptional protection. A designated authority, whose identity would also be kept confidential, would have the power to declare a case or a set of cases as a special security case.

The chief justice of the Lahore High Court would then appoint an Anti-Terrorism Court judge to handle the case. The bill also stipulates that the identities of all participants in such proceedings would remain undisclosed, with judicial orders displayed using official titles instead of names, and witnesses identified through coded designations.

The bill aims to provide enhanced security for individuals involved in terrorism cases while maintaining fairness in trials. However, it has sparked debate over potential constitutional and judicial issues, particularly the delegation of powers typically exercised by courts to an executive authority. Critics argue that the bill could result in "anonymous proceedings" that hinder an accused person's ability to challenge the tribunal's constitution, seek the removal of a judge, or question the judge's independence.

The proposal has also been criticized for potentially undermining the right to appeal and creating a standing exception to open justice. Furthermore, the bill's broad application to classes of cases rather than individual cases raises concerns about potential misuse. Proponents argue that the bill addresses existing gaps in safeguards for participants in terrorism cases, such as Section 21 of the Anti-Terrorism Act and the Punjab Witness Protection Act 2018, which provide mechanisms for protecting witnesses and holding proceedings in camera.

They suggest that if the assembly intends to reinforce security measures, the bill should retain judicial oversight and limit the executive's role to recommending security arrangements rather than overseeing trial proceedings.