The HRCP press release on “Judicial independence, freedoms and safety under siege” once again highlights a familiar issue: the organisation continues to interpret Pakistan’s security and governance challenges through a narrow, theoretical lens that does not match the reality on the ground. Its commentary is framed as if the country is functioning under stable, predictable conditions where routine administrative norms are enough to manage risks. In truth, Pakistan is navigating an environment marked by resurging terrorism, organised subversion, cross-border interference and the pressures of a hostile information landscape.

Under such circumstances, governments cannot rely on idealised procedures or textbook notions of governance; they must take measures that keep citizens, institutions and the state secure. HRCP argues that the 27th Constitutional Amendment undermines judicial independence, but this reading is incomplete. Judicial autonomy remains intact; the reform attempts to address long-standing gaps in accountability, procedural delays and structural inefficiencies that have eroded public trust in the justice system.

Coordination among state institutions becomes essential when national security is under strain, and the public expects quicker, more responsive justice mechanisms. Instead of recognising that the amendment responds to institutional imbalances and public frustration, HRCP depicts it as an encroachment of power. This approach reduces a complex constitutional debate to a simplified narrative crafted without considering current pressures. The same issue appears when HRCP comments on operations in KP and Balochistan.

It criticises security measures and internet restrictions without acknowledging that these are terrorism affected zones where militants exploit digital platforms for coordination, recruitment and misinformation. No state fighting terrorism of this scale offers unrestricted digital access to areas where hostile elements operate freely. Globally, even long-standing........

© Daily Times