Pakistan’s judiciary has plunged deeper into controversy as Judge Tahir Abbas Sipra hands down verdicts that critics describe not as justice, but as raw political punishment dressed up as law.
In a staggering development, Judge Sipra sentenced prominent dissidents and journalists — including Adil Raja, Moeed Pirzada, Sabir Shakir, and others to double life imprisonment along with 85 years of rigorous jail time each, in proceedings widely condemned as sham trials. The accused were reportedly denied the fundamental right to defend themselves, reinforcing accusations that the court functioned as an extension of state power rather than an independent judicial forum.
Legal observers and political analysts say these verdicts represent the complete collapse of due process. What unfolded, they argue, was not a trial but a pre-written script aimed at silencing voices critical of the establishment. The message is blunt: dissent will be crushed, not debated.
Judge Sipra’s role is not new to controversy. He is the same judge who earlier convicted PTI MNA Abdul Lateef Chitral in the widely disputed May 9 case a conviction PTI and independent analysts have labeled fabricated, politically engineered, and devoid of credible evidence. Together, these cases paint a disturbing picture of a judiciary being weaponized to dismantle political opposition.
Critics allege this is part of a calculated strategy by the military-backed regime: disqualify PTI lawmakers through courts, empty parliament of opposition voices, and then redistribute seats through stage managed by-elections to prop up an unpopular ruling setup. The courtroom, they say, has replaced the ballot box.
Human rights advocates warn that Pakistan is now operating under what they call “the law of the jungle,” where verdicts serve power, not justice. Over time, they argue, the Constitution has been bent, judges conditioned, and institutions hollowed out all to ensure obedience to the top command, currently under Army Chief Asim Munir.
Public anger is mounting as confidence in the judiciary erodes rapidly. Many now see the courts not as guardians of rights, but as instruments of repression, enforcing the will of a kleptocratic system terrified of political opposition and public accountability.