In Pakistan, justice often appears less about truth and more about narrative. Recent cases expose a troubling pattern: journalists and dissenters are dragged into terrorism courts, murder trials collapse under weak investigations, and figures convicted abroad are glorified at home. Taken together, they reveal a system that is overzealous in silencing dissent, ineffective in prosecuting actual violent crime, and deeply inconsistent in its moral compass.

Take the case of Matiullah Jan, a veteran journalist arrested in 2024 on terrorism charges for allegedly snatching a weapon and possessing narcotics. Forensic evidence has already undermined both allegations. The Supreme Court has rightly paused the framing of charges, noting that such restraint causes no prejudice to the State but immense prejudice to the individual. That intervention is welcome, but it should never have been necessary.

The burden of verification belongs with the investigating officer, not the Supreme Court. A preliminary investigation conducted with basic rigour would have exposed the forensic contradictions at the outset. Instead, a compromised case was allowed to travel all the way to the Supreme Court, wasting judicial resources and prolonging the ordeal for everyone involved, including the accused, who deserves a timely resolution, not indefinite legal limbo dressed up as due process.

The SC's role is to correct; it is not designed to compensate for........

© The Friday Times