Eleven children were abused in Pakistan every day in the year 2023, per Sahil – an NGO working for children’s welfare. In total, 4,213 cases of child abuse were reported with almost a parity between both genders. In terms of geographical concentration 75 per cent cases were reported in Punjab followed by Sindh, Islamabad and the other provinces.
And this is only the reported cases.
There is no doubt that the situation in our country is grim. The UN has ranked Pakistan as the ‘least safe’ country for children. These epithets and statistics stun us not only because we are a country that takes pride in being an Islamic Republic – although with little practical Islamic values to gloat – but also because our constitution embodies a promise of child welfare. In fact, it places children at a higher pedestal in terms of state’s priority through Article 25(3) which allows the state to make special provisions for the protection of children. Article 35 goes further and obligates the state to protect children.
To be fair, the state has delivered in legislation. Following the devolution of child welfare as a subject to provinces, we saw a series of child protection acts between 2010 and 2017. Punjab’s law of 2004 preceded these developments. These acts established comissions, child protections services and district units.
However, they only concerned a specific category of abuse – by family – and dealt with unique issues like custody. There was no special legislation on the means and methods for the conduct of trials and inquiry for the abuse itself until the heart-wrenching case of the rape and murder of six-year-old Zainab surfaced in the news. The case along with the traction it received spiraled a nation-wide epiphany that child abuse cases must be dealt with differently than those of adults.
The cause was not only disgust and horror at the crime, but also the realisation that there are many similar cases that do not receive the light of day either because of an unwillingness to report, or because of an absence of adequate reporting and prosecution mechanisms. The obvious ineptness and the simultaneous lack of empathy that underpins our criminal justice system need not be recounted.
A product of this realisation was the Zainab Alert, Response, and Recovery Act, 2020 which created ZARRA – an agency responsible for raising alerts, coordinating with law enforcement, and ensuring the recovery of missing children. ZARRA smoothened the reporting process and ensured that cases that would otherwise have been snubbed at the behest of political influence get reported. It penalises officials who refuse compliance.
The lacuna left, then, was amendments in the trial process. This is exactly what a proposed federal law attempts to fill. The driving force behind this law is the PML-N’s Nosheen Iftikhar, one of the few directly elected women to National Assembly. Speaking on a talk-show (Capital Talk) on January 7, 2025, she revealed some of the key aspects of the law.
Titled the Criminal Procedure Code Amendment Bill 2025, it proposes the creation of separate child abuse courts at the district level; fixes the maximum time for conduction of trial at six months; excludes the presence of opposing council (or accused) during the recording of victim’s statement; and denies bail to those accused of child abuse. The aim is to carve out a separate and congenial environment that does not aggravate children’s trauma.
The law also evens the provision of rights. It mandates medical examination of the victim within 24 hours for proper evidence recording. In the sanguine arena of our politics, the fact that the law was approved by the Standing Committee on Interior unanimously brings an assurance that our lawmakers can stall, if not drop, partisan interests for the nation. The same zeal is hoped and expected as the law enters parliament.
Supplementing the legislature’s proactiveness on the subject is the judiciary’s demands which make the law appear as an organic response to the judiciary’s expectations. The trailblazer in this regard has been Justice Mansoor Ali Shah of the Supreme Court. Speaking at a joint-venture titled ‘Re-imagine Justice for Children in Pakistan – the Voice of Children’, held by the Federal Judicial Academy and Unicef, he is reported as having said that “prioritising children’s rights is crucial, as it enables them to exercise and enjoy their human rights today, while also serving as an investment in our future.”
“We must prioritise child welfare and judges should adopt a child welfare-based approach”, said the judge on December 8, 2024.
His judgment in Mahmood Ahmad vs Moazzam Mahmood (2024 SCP 416), echoes the same thoughts. He maintains that judges must be adopting a ‘Child Justice Approach’ for “…children in contact with the law, who [utilise the law’s procedures and] must be safeguarded and supported throughout judicial processes.”
The same is in line with the guiding principles of the Convention on the Rights the Child which Pakistan is a signatory to and has an international obligation to comply by. These principles state that the best interest of the child should be the ‘primary consideration’ in all actions and specifically, that “children in contact with the law should be protected from any form of hardship while going through state and non-state justice processes and thereafter” and that they “…should be treated with care, sensitivity, fairness and respect throughout any procedure or case, with special attention for their personal situation, well-being and specific needs, and with full respect for their physical and psychological integrity.”
The proposed law tends to follow this ethos. However, it is not a text without concerns or issues. It is expected that the law would provide for online evidence in case the victim goes abroad. Although a well-intentioned measure, it may introduce complications that compromise the efficacy of trial. Then timelines are, as they have always been, mere directions in contrast to mandates with legal repercussions, given the age-old legal bifurcation between directory and mandatory provisions.
The biggest concern, however, remains. Laws and judgments can harshen punishments or smoothen procedures, but they cannot change mindsets. This change is what is needed most. Sex education and awareness of the difference between good and bad touch needs to be a part of school curriculum. Parents and teachers, both, need to engage in free-and-frank conversation on these topics with children.
Equally, our society needs to stop being a safe harbour for offenders. It is easy to say that offences like the Zainab case shock one’s conscience, but such statements mean little when we realise that lawmakers’ first attempt at reform was to protect children from the devastation at home and even with on-point legislation and judgments, the crime rate has only risen and our country remains ‘least-safe’.
Laws are tied to their context. Until the context changes, the text can only do much.
The writers are law students at LUMS.
With whatever distractions we may be spending our time, it is Donald Trump who lingers in the background. He is...
The Black Hole is a community centre in Islamabad that holds engaging discussions, conducts informative sessions, and...
Peer-to-Peer (P2P) refers to a decentralised system where individuals directly exchange assets, services, or...
When Pakistan was hit by record-breaking floods in 2022, a third of the country went underwater. Entire villages...
The ongoing human rights violations in Indian-occupied Kashmir (IIOJK) and the aggressive posture of the Indian...
The writer has a PhD in economics and business from the University of Guelph, Canada, and was a former VC at Abdul...
Candid cornerWith a vanquished judiciary via the 26th Amendment, the conquest of democracy is nearing its culmination....
The 9th edition of Maritime Exercise AMAN-2025, a multinational maritime security initiative led by the Pakistan Navy,...