The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued a judgement reviewing the meaning and scope of the term ‘terrorism’ as defined in the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and recommended that parliament bring changes to the current understanding of the term, which is “too wide”.
The 59-page judgement was authored by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Asif Saeed Khosa.
The court in its judgement observed that the matter had been “a subject of controversy” for some time and that “different honourable benches of varying strength deciding different cases have […] understood and interpreted the said term differently”.
“It is in this backdrop that the present larger bench has been constituted so as to put an end to that controversy,” read the judgement.
According to the judgement, the term ‘terrorism’ can be applied to the use of force, under an organised plan, for the realisation of religious, ideological or political goals.
It can also be applied when, under the plan, terror is struck in the hearts of people and damage dealt to lives and property. The offence of terrorism is also committed when under an organised plan, religious sectarianism is spread in society. The judgement also outlined what offences cannot be viewed as terrorism.
The court clearly distinguished in its judgement that acts of violence, such as setting things on fire and extortion, committed under a personal vendetta arising out of enmity or hostility are not ‘terrorism’.
Personal enmity as a result of contempt for a person’s religion is not terrorism.
A person’s involvement in an act of violence owing to hostility or personal enmity against the police, army or government employees does not fall within the scope of terrorism, ruled the court.
The court recommended that the Parliament consider substituting the current definition with “a more succinct” one bringing it “in line with the international perspectives of that offence and focusing on violent activities aimed at achieving political, ideological or religious objectives”.
“We further recommend that the Parliament may also consider suitably amending the preamble to the Act and removing all those offences from the Third Schedule to the Act which offences have no nexus with the offence of terrorism,” said the judgement.
