THE life sentences handed down by an anti-terrorism court to bloggers and journalists for their alleged role in the events of May 9, 2023, raise questions about proportionality, due process and the future of free expression in Pakistan.
No doubt, the violence that followed the arrest of former prime minister Imran Khan, including attacks on military and state installations, crossed several red lines. Similarly, much of the digital commentary circulating at the time was excessive, speculative, irresponsible and, in cases, non-factual. While criticism by some of the convicted had not breached acceptable bounds, the others had cultivated audiences through sensationalism, half-truths and a combative tone that blurred the line between opinion and incitement. This deserves criticism. Freedom of expression does not grant a licence to spread disinformation or inflame passions during moments of crisis.
It is also worth recalling the irony that several of these voices were once prominent cheerleaders for PTI during its ascent, attacking its political opponents, including Nawaz Sharif and his party, without attracting similar legal scrutiny from the state. The selective nature of accountability weakens the moral authority of the state’s actions. Yet acknowledging these realities does not make the sentence any less unsettling.
Handing out life terms to journalists and bloggers, following trials in absentia and under the sweeping ambit of anti-terrorism laws, is disproportionate to the alleged offences of speech and commentary. Measured legal remedies were available. Where content was defamatory, demonstrably false or malicious, civil defamation proceedings or narrow criminal charges could have addressed the harm without invoking the most extreme state instruments.
By choosing the harshest path, the authorities risk setting a precedent that may threaten legitimate journalism and dissent far beyond the individuals involved. Stability is linked to maintaining a fair justice system. A secure state should be able to confront irresponsible speech without resorting to excessive penalties.
Published in Dawn, January 4th, 2026
