Pakistan

The police have primary internal security responsibilities, although paramilitary forces, such as the Rangers and the Frontier Constabulary, provide support in areas where law and order problems are acute, such as Karachi and the frontier areas. Provincial governments control the police and the paramilitary forces when they are assisting in law and order operations. In 2000 the Government announced a devolution plan that included some increase in local political control of the police; the plan was implemented on August 14 but no significant improvements were reported by year's end. During some religious holidays, the regular army is deployed in sensitive areas to help maintain public order. After the coup, the army played a role in enforcing exit control restrictions at airports and border crossings. Members of the police committed numerous serious human rights abuses.

Pakistan is a poor country with great extremes in the distribution of wealth; its population is approximately 140 million. Education, especially for women, is poor; only 33 percent of the population are judged literate, even using a very low standard. Cotton, textiles and apparel, rice, and leather products are the principal exports. The economy includes both state-run and private industries and financial institutions. The suspended Constitution provided for the right of private businesses to operate freely in most sectors of the economy and there continued to be a strong private sector. The per capita annual income is approximately $475 (PRs 30,000). During the year, the Government pursued several major economic reforms designed to alleviate poverty. In September, the Government successfully completed a 10-month Standby Agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) aimed at stabilizing the economy and restoring fiscal discipline through improvements in governance. The Government also completed work on a poverty reduction strategy report that received joint IMF-World Bank approval in December. The report was the result of an 18-month consultative process between the Government, nongovernmental organizations (NGO's), civic groups, the public, and international donors that was aimed at building a framework for eliminating poverty. On the basis of the Government's commitment to eliminate poverty, on December 12 the IMF approved a $1.3 billion, 3-year Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility program for the country that is to help the Government to complete its economic reform program. With the assistance of international donors, the Government increased funding commitments to health, education, and rural job creation programs.

The Government's human rights record remained poor; although there were some improvements in a few areas, particularly with regard to protection of religious minorities from intimidation from extremists, serious problems remained. Citizens continued to be denied the right to change their national and provincial governments peacefully but participated in local government elections during the year that provided increased power to district mayors and councils. Police committed numerous extrajudicial killings; however, the total number of such killings has declined in recent years. In Karachi there were fewer killings between rival political factions during the year; however, there was an increase in violence and killings between rival religious sects. Police abused and raped citizens. While the officers responsible for such abuses sometimes were transferred or suspended for their actions, no officer has been convicted and very few have been arrested. The Government conducted a series of trainings for police officers in provincial capitals; in these trainings, human rights abuses committed by law enforcement officials were acknowledged openly. In Karachi there were signs of progress in redressing police excesses; however, in general police continued to commit serious abuses with impunity. Prison conditions remained extremely poor and life threatening, and police arbitrarily arrested and detained citizens. In midyear the Government undertook a major effort to curb religious extremism. Two organizations responsible for sectarian killings were banned on August 14, and by year's end, the Government had accelerated a crackdown on members of several extremist religious groups. During the year, the last remaining Sharif government leaders in custody were released; however, Mehtab Abbasi and Javed Hashmi, two senior politicians allied to Nawaz Sharif, were detained by the National Accountability Bureau and remained in custody at year's end. Supporters claimed that their arrests were politically motivated. Several major political leaders remained in exile abroad at year's end. Case backlogs led to long delays in trials, and lengthy pretrial detention is common. The judiciary is subject to executive and other outside influences, and corruption, inefficiency, and lack of resources remained problems. The Government has taken steps to control the judiciary and to remove itself from judicial oversight. Some aspects of the Government's implementation of its anticorruption campaign violated due process. In April 2000, the Sindh Court found former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif guilty of treason and other charges; however, the court imposed a life sentence instead of the death penalty sought by the Musharraf Government. The court acquitted Sharif's six codefendants. In October 2000, the Sindh High Court upheld Sharif's conviction. In December 2000, the Government commuted Sharif's prison sentence and exiled him and 18 of his family members to Saudi Arabia for 10 years. The Government infringed on citizens' privacy rights.

The press was able to publish relatively freely; however, several journalists practiced self-censorship, especially on sensitive issues related to the military. There was no systematic harassment campaign against newspapers or commentators critical of the Government during the year; however, provincial and local governments occasionally arrested journalists and closed newspapers accused of printing offensive material. The broadcast media remain a closely controlled government monopoly. Journalists often were targets of harassment and violence by individuals and groups. The Government restricted freedom of assembly. During the year, the Government sporadically permitted several large antigovernment demonstrations; however, it prevented other protests and arrested organizers, including for security reasons. In March 2000, the Government instituted a country-wide ban on strikes, processions, and outdoor political demonstrations. The Government maintained some limits on freedom of association. The Government continued to impose limits on freedom of religion, particularly for Ahmadis. The Government also imposed limits on freedom of movement. President Musharraf has spoken out against some of the human rights abuses of the previous government; however, the Government only made minimal progress toward achieving the goals set at an April 2000 human rights conference and subsequent conferences devoted to human rights themes that were held during the year. However, progress in certain areas can only be made in the long term with significant resource commitments.

Significant numbers of women were subjected to violence, abuse, rape, and other forms of degradation by spouses and members of society. The Government publicly has criticized the practice of "honor killings" but failed to take corrective steps, and such killings continued throughout the country. Discrimination against women was widespread, and traditional social and legal constraints kept women in a subordinate position in society. Violence against children, as well as child abuse, and prostitution, remained serious problems. Female children still lag far behind boys in education, health care, and other social indices. Governmental and societal discrimination against religious minorities, particularly Ahmadis and Christians, remained a problem, and the Government failed to take effective measures to counter prevalent public prejudices against religious minorities. Religious and ethnic-based rivalries resulted in numerous killings and civil disturbances; however, President Musharraf and several cabinet ministers publicly condemned efforts by some clerics to foment hatred and announced a plan to deny the use of madrassahs (Islamic religious schools) for extremist purposes. The Government and employers continued to restrict worker rights significantly. Debt slavery persisted, and bonded labor by both adults and children remained a problem. The use of child labor remained widespread, although it generally is recognized as a serious problem, and industrial exporters have adopted a number of measures to eliminate child labor from specific sectors. Trafficking in women and children for the purposes of prostitution and bonded labor was a serious problem. Mob violence and terrorist attacks remained problems.

RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

Section 1 Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom From:

a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life

Police committed extrajudicial killings. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) noted that there were 169 extrajudicial killings during the year, a decrease from the 271 extrajudicial killings reported in 2000. The police and were responsible for the deaths of a number of individuals associated with political or terrorist groups during the year.

The extrajudicial killing of criminal suspects, often while in police custody or in staged encounters in which police shoot and kill suspects, is common. Police officials generally insist that these deaths occur during attempts to escape or to resist arrest; family members and the press insist that many of these deaths are staged. Police personnel have been known to kill suspected criminals to prevent them from implicating police in crimes during court proceedings. After an attempt was made on then-Prime Minister Sharif's life in January 1999, as many as 40 Sunni Muslims associated with the Lashkar-i-Jhangvi, the group thought to be responsible for the attack, may have been killed in police encounters. In addition to killing suspects to prevent them from implicating the police in court, police reportedly killed suspected criminals to circumvent or overcome insufficient evidence, witness intimidation, judicial corruption, and, at times, political pressure. The judiciary, on the other hand, faults the police for presenting weak cases that do not stand up in court.

According to the Society for Human Rights and Prisoner's Aid (SHARP), a local NGO, 43 deaths due to police torture were reported during the year. Amnesty International (AI) estimates that at least 100 persons die from police torture each year (see Section 1.c.).

On October 9, three protesters, including a 13-year-old boy, were killed when police fired into a crowd that was attempting to attack a police station and a post office in Kuchlak. The protestors, who mainly were Afghan refugees, were protesting military action in Afghanistan. According to witnesses, the protesters were killed in an exchange of fire between police and some of the protesters. The police stated that they acted in self-defense, and that three police officers were injured in the incident. On November 9, four demonstrators, who mostly were students from a local madrassah, were killed by police in Dera Ghazi Khan, Punjab, while attempting to stop a police van carrying the leader of the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JM), a militant Sunni Muslim religious group. The police stated that they fired at the demonstrators after they attacked several policemen.

During the year, the HRCP reported disturbances at prisons by prisoners over their mistreatment by prison staff. Eleven prisoners at Adiala jail in Rawalpindi beat a police officer for not allowing their visitors to meet with them. Similar incidents were reported in Sahiwal and Faisalabad districts. There were reports that four prisoners died in a riot in a Peshawar jail in October 2000; however, prison authorities denied these reports. No disciplinary actions were taken or charges filed in connection with the incident, and the Government is unlikely to take further action.

A committee of inquiry was established in 1999 to look into the death of Pakistan Muslim League youth wing leader Qasim Khan, who died while in the custody of the Peshawar police in July 1999. However, despite requests from human rights activists, the committee did not publish its findings, and the officer who allegedly was involved in the killing retained his position. According to a member of the HRCP, Khan's family agreed to financial compensation from the police officer. Khan's family may have dropped the inquiry under pressure from the local police. Further action in this case is unlikely.

The Muttahida Quami Movement (MQM), an urban Sindh-based political party that in the past used violence to further its aims, claimed that the police specifically targeted its adherents for extrajudicial killings. Altaf Hussain established the MQM in 1984 to promote the rights of Mohajirs, the descendants of Urdu-speaking Muslims who migrated from India to Pakistan following partition in 1947. Elements of the group became involved in extortion and other forms of racketeering, and the party split into the MQM-Altaf--the original group headed by Altaf Hussain, a large breakaway group (MQM-Haqiqi), and a few smaller factions. The MQM-Altaf, in part because of its efficient organization and willingness to use violence, became the dominant political party in Karachi and Hyderabad; however, the party sent several moderate and nonviolent leaders to the suspended Parliament and the Sindh provincial assembly. Because of its past links to violent groups, the MQM-Altaf has antagonized followers, suffered violent breakaways, and continually been at odds with successive governments. The MQM-Altaf reported that 12 of its members were killed during the year; 1 while in police custody, 2 by members of the MQM-Haqiqi, and 9 by unknown assailants. The MQM-Altaf alleged that the Government may have been responsible for some of the killings by unknown assailants. In a 1999 report, the MQM listed 10 persons, mostly MQM activists, that it alleged were killed extrajudicially by Karachi police between October 1998 and March 1999. Since the coup, reports of extrajudicial killings of MQM activists have dropped sharply. However, in September 2000, two MQM activists were killed, allegedly by government forces.

Police officers occasionally are transferred or briefly suspended for involvement in extrajudicial killings. However, court-ordered inquiries into these killings have resulted in few trials and no convictions. In general police continued to commit such killings with impunity. In February 2000, two police inspectors who were charged with killing a member of the Muttahida Quami Movement in custody were denied bail after the Sindh High Court determined that they had falsified precinct records and appeared to have committed the crime. Punjabi police killed Tahir Prince in February 1999; after his mother filed a writ, the Lahore High Court ordered a case registered against two police officers, one of whom was dismissed midyear on charges of corruption. Tahir Prince's family then accepted financial compensation and dropped the case against the two officers. There were no high profile cases of extrajudicial killing reported during the first 9 months of the year.

Police professionalism is low. New officers only receive 6 months of training, and many hires are the result of political patronage rather than merit. Salaries and benefits are inadequate. However, in August the Government introduced a comprehensive package of police reforms. Key changes include transferring oversight of district superintendents of police (DSP) (a rank roughly equivalent to a lieutenant colonel) from federally appointed district commissioners to elected district mayors; granting DSPs permission to order the use of live fire on their own authority; and the establishment of public safety commissions at the district level. Under this system, a police officer who believes that the district mayor is abusing his authority over local law enforcement will have a place to seek redress.

There were at least two high profile killings during 2000. In January 2000, unknown assailants killed the chief justice designate of the Baluchistan High Court; it is likely that the killing was a personal vendetta. In March 2000, unknown assailants killed Iqbal Raad, one of the defense lawyers for former Prime Minister Sharif. However, many observers believe that Raad's involvement in the Sharif trial was not a factor in his death. Although there were no reports of politically prominent Afghans being targeted for killings during the year, local newspapers reported that more than 10 politically prominent Afghans were killed during 2000 (see Section 2.d.). Afghans attributed some of these killings to personal rather than political disputes. The police did not arrest anyone in connection with these killings.

Politically motivated and sectarian violence continued with several persons killed during the year. On January 28, Sheikhul Hadih Maulana Inayatullah of Karachi was killed by six unidentified assailants who intercepted his van while he was traveling to his school, Jamia Farooqia, a Sunni Muslim seminary known for its strident anti-Shi'a Muslim teachings. Local commentators believe the killing to be the work of Sipah-e-Mohammad, a Shi'a Muslim extremist group. On March 1, sectarian rioting in Hangu, a small city in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP), resulted in at least 10 deaths. Prior to the riots, the Sunni Muslim extremist group Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP) had arranged prayer gatherings throughout the NWFP for SSP activist Haq Nawaz, who was executed on February 28 for the 1990 killing of the leader of the Iranian cultural center in Lahore. SSP activists reportedly left one of these gatherings and proceeded to Hangu's main shopping area where they shot and killed three Shi'a shopkeepers and one Sunni bystander, among others. On March 4, between 12 and 16 persons, including 2 police officers, were killed when 4 men opened fire in an Imambargah (a Shi'a mosque) in Sheikhupura. On May 18, a vehicle carrying Saleem Qadri, the leader of the Sunni Tehrik Party, and seven others, was attacked by six men with automatic weapons. Qadri and the others had been on their way to Friday prayers in Karachi. The Sunni Tehrik Party is a mid-sized Sunni Muslim extremist organization with a reputation for carrying out bombings, shootings, and other acts of violence. Local commentators speculated that rival Sunni extremist groups, including the Jaish-e-Mohammad and the SSP, may have ordered Qadri's killing. On July 26, Shaukat Raza, a Shi'a Muslim and CEO of Pakistan State Oil, was killed in Karachi, most likely by Sunni Muslim extremists. On July 28, Siddique Khan Kanju, a Shi'a Muslim and former Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, was killed in district Lodhran, Punjab, most likely by Sunni Muslim extremists. On August 27, unknown assailants shot and killed a Shi'a Muslim Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kausar Abbas Shah Gillani, in Bahawalpur, Punjab. On December 21, unknown assailants shot and killed Ehtehshamuddin Haider, brother of Interior Minister Moinuddin Haider, as he left work at the Fatimid Hospital Foundation in Karachi. Some have speculated that he was killed in response to the Interior Minister's crackdown on extremist groups. A police investigation was underway but no arrests had been made in connection with the case by year's end.

On October 28, three assailants shot and killed a police officer on guard outside of St. Dominic's church in Bahawalpur during Protestant services at the church; they then entered the church, closed its doors, and began firing into the congregation. Sixteen persons were killed. Police arrested 18 members of the Jaish-i-Mohammad in connection with the massacre, although as of December none of them had been charged. Government officials stated that the investigation was ongoing at year's end.

There were numerous bombings during the year. For example, on August 20, 1 person was killed and 15 persons were injured when a bomb exploded near a communal water tap in the Dhabi Bazaar area of Lahore (see Section 1.c.). In 2000 there were many bombings throughout the country that killed more than 50 persons and injured more than 200 others. No one claimed responsibility for any of these acts; such bombings have taken place for many years.

More than 800 women were killed by family members in so-called "honor killings;" honor killings are a problem. Mehvish Miankhel, a member of an influential political family in Dera Ghazi Khan, allegedly was killed by her uncle in April. Her uncle had accused her of having an affair with the family's driver. A criminal complaint was filed against Miankhel's uncle, father, grandfather, two cousins, and two maternal uncles on July 7. All were granted prearrest bail and were not detained. In March 2000, women's rights activists told a local newspaper that the frequency of honor killings was on the rise. For example, on June 1, 2000, a man from Yar Hussain in the NWFP allegedly killed his 20-year-old daughter, Mumlikat Bibi, while she was sleeping. The father reportedly opposed his daughter's efforts to choose a spouse without parental consent (see Sections 1.f. and 5).

Tension along the line of control between Pakistan and Indian-held Kashmir was high during the year, and there was shelling in several sectors. A senior army official in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir estimated that approximately 150 civilians were killed on the Pakistani side of the line of control.

b. Disappearance

There were credible reports of politically motivated disappearances. For example, retired Major General Anwar Sher and an Afghan aide, Abdul Qaher Shariati, disappeared in July 2000; they were active in organizing Afghans to pursue a peace process. There has been no police investigation into the disappearances. In the intra-Mohajir violence in Karachi, victims sometimes first are held and tortured by opposing groups (or, as the MQM-Altaf alleges, by security forces). Bodies of these victims, often mutilated, generally are dumped in the street soon after the victims are abducted; however, the incidence of such crimes decreased greatly during 2000.

In July 2000, a woman in Baluchistan was abducted by members of her tribe after a tribal jirga (council) forced the woman to annul her marriage. There were no new developments in the case during the year. Human rights observers state that government officials rarely get involved in tribal affairs.

c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

The suspended Constitution and the Penal Code expressly forbid torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment; however, police regularly torture, beat, and otherwise abuse persons. Police routinely use force to elicit confessions; however, there were fewer reports of torture by police during the year. Some human rights groups have stated that this decrease reflects the influence of army monitoring teams, who discourage the use of torture; other observers have suggested that the frequency of torture remained unchanged, but the media devoted less attention to the issue during the year. Human rights observers suggest that, because of widespread torture by the police, suspects usually confess to crimes regardless of their actual culpability; the courts subsequently throw out many such confessions. According to the Society for Human Rights and Prisoner's Aid (SHARP), a local NGO, 43 deaths due to police torture were reported during the year. AI estimates that at least 100 persons die from police torture each year. According to a 1999 Human Rights Watch report, children in detention also are subjected to torture and mistreatment.

Police personnel continued to torture persons in custody throughout the country. In May a Christian NGO in Sargodha reported that a Christian man was arrested and tortured by a police Station House Officer (SHO) who had a personal grievance against him. The man was released from custody without charges having been filed. In June 2000, a local newspaper reported that prisoners waiting to appear in court routinely are held in fetters in police vans, even on extremely hot days. According to MQM officials, police arrested more than 700 MQM members during 1999 and 2000 (see Section 1.d.); many of these persons reportedly were tortured in custody. The MQM claims that the police arrested 400 of its members during the year under the Maintenance of Public Order Act. Almost all of them had been released by year's end, but the MQM reported that a total of 500 of its members remained jailed in Karachi (including a former provincial assembly member) and another 300 were jailed in Sindh at year's end. In November 1999, Rana Sanaullah Khan, a Pakistan Muslim League (PML) member of the suspended Punjab provincial assembly, was arrested for criticizing the Musharraf Government; he reportedly was tortured in custody. No investigation was carried out regarding these cases, and the Government is unlikely to take further action.

Common torture methods include: Beating; burning with cigarettes; whipping the soles of the feet; sexual assault; prolonged isolation; electric shock; denial of food or sleep; hanging upside down; forced spreading of the legs with bar fetters; and public humiliation. Some magistrates help cover up the abuse by issuing investigation reports stating that the victims died of natural causes.

Human rights organizations and the press have criticized the provision of the Anti-Terrorist Act that allows confessions obtained in police custody to be used in "special courts," because police torture of suspects is common. Police generally did not attempt to use confessions to secure convictions under this law, and the Government agreed to amend the law after the Supreme Court in 1998 invalidated this and other sections of the Anti-Terrorist Act.

There was greater scrutiny by NGO's and the media of police behavior, including prison inspections in the Punjab and Sindh. In 2000 in Karachi the Citizens Police Liaison Committee (CPLC) brought cases against police officers who make false arrests, practice torture, or take bribes. However, a CPLC member reported that no new cases had been filed against police officers during the year. CPLC officials believed that police reforms introduced during the year (including increased oversight by elected officials) were responsible for fewer abuses. During the year, 1,888 Karachi police officers reportedly were punished for various offenses. Of these, 552 officers were discharged, 64 received compulsory retirement, and 83 were demoted or had their pay docked. Cooperation between the CPLC and the police human rights complaint cell resulted in the dismissal of 216 policemen and the demotion of or fines for 1,226 others between November 1998 and July 1999.

The Hudood Ordinances, which aimed to make the Penal Code more Islamic, provide for harsh punishments for violations of Shari'a (Islamic law), including death by stoning for unlawful sexual relations and amputation for other crimes. These so-called Hadd punishments require a high standard of evidence. In effect four adult Muslim men of good character must witness an act for a Hadd punishment to apply. In over 20 years since the Hudood Ordinances were adopted, not a single Hadd punishment has been carried out. However, on the basis of lesser evidence, ordinary punishments such as jail terms or fines are imposed. From 1979 to 1995, more than 1 million Hudood cases were filed, and 300,000 were heard by the courts. More recent statistics are unavailable. The Hudood Ordinances are applied to Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

In March 2000, a judge sentenced two prisoners convicted of killing almost 100 children to be executed by having their bodies cut into 100 and 98 pieces, respectively, and then having the pieces dissolved in acid. Legal experts criticized the judgment as overly harsh. On October 9, one of the two defendants, Javed Iqbal, apparently committed suicide in his prison cell.

Special women's police stations have been established in response to growing numbers of complaints of custodial abuse of women, including rape. These stations are staffed by female personnel, but receive even fewer material and human resources than regular police stations. Efforts to raise funds for the stations during the year achieved minimal progress. According to the Government's Commission of Inquiry for Women, the stations do not function independently or fulfill their purpose. Despite court orders and regulations that only female officers may interrogate female suspects, women continued to be detained overnight at regular police stations and abused by male officers. Based on Lahore newspaper reports from January to May 1999, the HRCP found 11 cases of violence, rape, or torture of women in police custody. Instances of abuse of women in prisons are less frequent than in police stations. Sexual abuse of child detainees by police or guards reportedly also is a problem.

Police routinely use excessive force against demonstrators or strikers. On January 10, police used batons in a charge against members and sympathizers of the All Faiths Spiritual Movement during a protest against the blasphemy laws. Sixteen demonstrators were arrested. One protester later acknowledged that police initiated the crackdown only after issuing several verbal warnings ordering the protesters to disperse. In early June 2000, police used force to disperse a group of protesters, injuring four persons. Police accused the protesters of throwing stones and bricks at them, but some eyewitnesses alleged that the police fired without provocation. Later that month, police used batons and deployed tear gas during a rally of businessmen. In both incidents, the protesters were challenging government plans to collect sales taxes.

Police at times also beat journalists (see Section 2.a.).

Police failed in some instances to protect members of religious minorities--particularly Ahmadis and Christians--from societal attacks (see Sections 2.c. and 5).

Despite some cases during the year in which police officers were investigated or charged in connection with abuse of detainees, the failure of the Government to prosecute and to punish abusers effectively is the single greatest obstacle to ending or reducing police abuse. The authorities sometimes transferred, suspended, or arrested offending officers, but seldom prosecuted or punished them; investigating officers generally shield their colleagues. However, on May 14, the Supreme Court upheld the Lahore High Court's January 5 conviction of two government doctors for submitting false statements regarding police torture of prisoner Nadeem Iqbal. The Lahore High Court previously ordered the arrest of the police officials in charge of the Sialkot district police station where Iqbal was tortured; at year's end, three police officers had been jailed in connection with the torture of Iqbal. All three were found guilty by an internal police investigation. In February 2000, Deputy Inspector General Fayyaz Ahmed Leghari stated that in 1999 Sindh police penalized 28,000 officers for malfeasance, and discharged or compulsorily retired 1,100 out of a total provincial force of 85,000. In February 2000, two police inspectors charged with killing an MQM activist in custody in 1998 were denied bail after the Sindh High Court determined that they falsified precinct records and appeared to have committed the crime (see Section 1.a.). During the year, the two police inspectors were released on bail.

Police corruption is widespread. Police and prison officials frequently use the threat of abuse to extort money from prisoners and their families. Police accept money for registering cases on false charges and torture innocent citizens. Persons pay the police to humiliate their opponents and to avenge their personal grievances. During the year, the Government took some steps to reduce police corruption and transferred several senior police officers to other provinces to circumvent their local ties. The Government also deployed army officers to police stations.

Prior to the October 1999 coup, successive governments recruited police officers in violation of considerations of merit and the department's regulations. In some instances, recruits had criminal records. Police corruption was most serious at the level of the Station House Officer (SHO), the official who runs each precinct. In 1998 300 SHO's recruited on merit began a long-delayed special training course; the new SHOs have been hired but there has been no significant improvement in police performance. Some SHO's widely are believed to operate arrest-for-ransom operations, and establish unsanctioned police stations to collect illicit revenue. An August 2000 news report listed seven such stations in Karachi. SHO's are powerful; although no such incidents were reported during the year, some are believed to have killed superior officers who tried to stop corrupt practices in the past. Senior government officials have confirmed that police stations, and assignments therein, are sold to interested parties who then proceed to recoup their investment though illicit activities.

In August the Government implemented reforms at the local level that included taking responsibility for the police away from the nonelected District Commissioners while granting oversight authority over the police to the newly elected district nazims (mayors) and newly organized Public Safety Commissions (that are composed of elected and nonelected members). The impact of this reform remained unclear at year's end, although some critics claim that the reforms will make it easier for politicians to order the police to intimidate and harass their political opponents. Senior government officials predict that it will take several years of sustained political and financial commitment before positive gains are achieved. Actions taken to redress police abuses often have mixed results. In urban Sindh, the CPLC committees helped to curb some excesses, but complaints of large-scale police abuses persist.

A number of bombings killed and injured many persons during the year. For example, on August 20, 1 person was killed and 15 persons were injured when a bomb exploded near a communal water tap in the Dhabi Bazaar area of Lahore. No one claimed responsibility for the bombing; police investigated the incident, but no arrests had been made by year's end.

Prison conditions are extremely poor and life threatening. Overcrowding is widespread. According to the HRCP, there are 80,000 prisoners in jails that were built to hold a maximum of 35,833 persons. In 1999 a journalist for the Nation newspaper visited Adiala jail in Rawalpindi and reported that the prison held 4,277 prisoners but was built for 2,000. According to a February 2000 press report, Sindh provincial officials claimed that the 16 jails of Sindh province, with a total capacity of 7,759 prisoners, actually housed more than 14,000. Karachi central prison is the most overcrowded, with a population of 4,087 prisoners in a space designed for only 991; only 2 toilets are available per every 100 prisoners and the daily food budget in the lowest class of cells equals about $.02 (Pr 1) per prisoner. The HRCP claimed that the Lahore district jail, built to house 1,045 prisoners, contains 3,200. In July 1999, the Punjab Home Department admitted before the Lahore High Court that more than 50,000 prisoners were held in Punjabi jails meant for 17,271. In the NWFP, 21 prisons with a total capacity of 7,397 prisoners housed 10,194 persons, including 485 children. Some 80 percent of prisoners are awaiting trial, mostly for petty offenses.

There are three classes (A, B, and C) of prison facilities. Class "C" cells generally hold common criminals and those in pretrial detention. Such cells often have dirt floors and no furnishings. Prisoners in these cells reportedly suffer the most abuse, including beatings and forced kneeling for long periods of time. In 1998 the Senate's Committee on Human Rights reported that at one facility in Hyderabad, 60 prisoners were confined to a space 100 feet by 30 feet with only 1 latrine. Such unsanitary conditions are common in small, poorly ventilated, and decrepit colonial-era prisons, which mainly are classified as class "C." Inadequate food, often consisting of only a few pieces of bread, leads to chronic malnutrition for those unable to supplement their diet with help from family or friends. Access to medical care is a problem. Mentally ill prisoners normally lack adequate care and are not segregated from the general prison population (see Section 5). Foreign prisoners, mostly citizens of African countries with minimal diplomatic representation, often remain in prison long after their sentences are completed because there is no one to pay for their deportation to their home country. Government officials claim that years of inadequate budgets are the reason for poor prison conditions. Conditions in "A" and "B" cells are markedly better; prisoners in these cells are permitted to have servants, special food, and satellite television. Authorities reserve "A" cells for prominent persons, including political leaders. Especially prominent individuals--including some political figures--sometimes are held under house arrest and permitted to receive visitors. "B" cells often are used for prisoners with a university education or who benefit from political connections.

Shackling of prisoners is routine. The principal of the Institute for Jail Staff Training in Lahore stated in a July 1999 press interview that fettering is the most convenient way to administer an overcrowded jail. Although fettering was banned nationally in April 2000, many prisoners continue to be fettered for administrative convenience or in an attempt to solicit bribes. The shackles used are tight, heavy, and painful, and reportedly have led to gangrene and amputation in several cases. No cases concerning the fettering of minors were reported in the press during the year.

Unlike the previous year, there were no reports of major prison riots.

Female detainees and prisoners are held separately from male detainees and prisoners. According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, there were 700 women in jail in Sindh province at year's end, including 247 in Karachi Central Jail. According to the Ministry of Interior, there were 27 women in jail in Baluchistan province; 18 were awaiting the completion of trials and 9 were convicted criminals. Pretrial detainees often are not segregated from convicted criminals.

There is only one jail in each province for convicted prisoners under 21 years of age, and children frequently are incarcerated along with the general prison population, sharing prison conditions that are extremely poor. Many children in prison were born to female inmates who were sexually abused by prison guards. Punjab and Sindh provinces have laws mandating special judicial procedures for child offenders; however, in practice children and adults essentially are treated equally. According to a local NGO, an estimated 4,200 children were held in the nation's prisons at the end of 2000, some as young as 8 years old, compared with 4,000 in 1999. Imprisoned children often spend long periods of time in prison awaiting trial or a hearing before a magistrate, often in violation of the law. One child spent 3 years and 4 months awaiting trial. Children are subject to the same delays and inefficiencies in the justice system as are adults (see Sections 1.d. and 1.e.). Peshawar's jail in 1998 contained 183 children, 40 percent of whom were Afghan refugees. These prisoners were separated from the adult prisoners. According to some estimates, there are 900 children in Karachi's central jail, in a space meant to house 300; these children are 18 and under. Human Rights Watch reports that children frequently are beaten and even tortured while in detention; usually this is done to extract confessions, but it is done also to punish or intimidate child detainees or to extort payment from their families for their release. Sexual abuse of child detainees by police or guards reportedly is a problem as well.

Courts also may order that children be sent to reform schools or various types of residential facilities, many designed to provide vocational or other training. There are two facilities--one in Karachi and one in Bahawalpur--that serve as reform schools for juvenile offenders. Juvenile offenders and, in some cases, homeless and destitute children, may be sent to these residential facilities, for terms not to exceed the amount of time until they reach majority. Conditions in these institutions reportedly are poor, similar to those found in jails. Abuse and torture of the children in such institutions is a problem; one study found that 17.4 percent of the inmates of the Youthful Offenders Industrial School in Karachi had been tortured or otherwise mistreated. Educational facilities in these institutions often are inadequate; however, during 2000 an NGO in Karachi started a school for the approximately 1 dozen children forced to live in a Karachi women's prison. Extortion on the part of the staff at such institutions reportedly is widespread; parents of inmates often are required to pay lower level staff members to visit their children or bring them food. Drug trafficking by guards and other staff also is a problem; some children reportedly have developed drug habits while in these institutions and are supplied drugs by their guards.

The Government permits prison visits by human rights monitors (see Section 1.d.). Landlords in Sindh and political factions in Karachi operated private jails (see Section 1.d.).

d. Arbitrary Arrest, Detention, or Exile

The law prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention; however, the authorities do not always comply with the law and police arbitrarily arrested and detained citizens. The law permits the District Coordinating Officer (DCO) of a local district to order detention without charge for 30 days of persons suspected of threatening public order and safety. The DCO may renew detention in 30-day increments, up to a total of 90 days. Human rights monitors report instances in which prisoners jailed under the Maintenance of Public Order Act have been imprisoned for up to 6 months without charge. For other criminal offenses, police may hold a suspect for 24 hours without charge. After a prisoner appears before a magistrate, the court may grant permission for continued detention for a maximum period of 14 days if the police provide material proof that this is necessary for an investigation. The Musharraf Government created the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and special accountability courts to try corruption cases; the National Accountability Ordinance initially permitted those suspected of corrupt practices to be detained for 90 days without charge (see Section 1.e.). In April the Supreme Court modified several provisions of the NAB ordinance. It reduced the NAB's freedom to hold suspects without charge from 90 days to 15 days, renewable with judicial concurrence. The maximum period of disqualification from political office pursuant to a corruption conviction was reduced from 21 years to 10 years, and the court required that future appointments of key NAB officials receive the Chief Justice's concurrence.

Police may arrest individuals on the basis of a First Incident Report (FIR) filed by a complainant, and have been known to file FIR's without supporting evidence. FIR's frequently are used to harass or intimidate individuals. Charges against an individual also may be based on a "blind" FIR, which lists the perpetrators as "person or persons unknown." If the case is not solved, the FIR is placed in the inactive file. When needed, a FIR is reactivated and taken to a magistrate by the police; the police then name a suspect and ask that the suspect be remanded for 14 days while they investigate further. After 14 days, the case is dropped for lack of evidence, but then another FIR is activated and brought against the accused. In this manner, rolling charges can be used to hold a suspect in custody continuously.

If the police can provide material proof that detention (physical remand or police custody for the purpose of interrogation) is necessary for an investigation, a court may extend detention for a total of 14 days. However, such proof may be little more than unsubstantiated assertions by the police. In practice the authorities do not observe fully the limits on detention. Police are not required to notify anyone when an arrest is made and often hold detainees without charge until a court challenges them. The police sometimes detain individuals arbitrarily without charge or on false charges to extort payment for their release. In Karachi small squads of police stopped taxis and delivery trucks for bribes. On October 11, a newspaper reported an incident in which a constable, Abid of Pir Wadhai police station, went to the Hotel Anarkali and asked for a room for his friend. When the hotel staff insisted that the constable present identification, the policeman allegedly arrested the hotel manager and eight other members of the hotel staff. The detainees were released after the local business community brought the abuse to the attention of a senior police official. The case later was settled out of court. Human rights monitors report that a number of police stations have secret detention cells in which individuals are kept while police bargain for their release. There also were reports that the police move prisoners from one police station to another if they suspect a surprise visit by higher authorities. Some women continued to be detained arbitrarily and sexually abused (see Sections 1.c. and 5).

The Federally Administered Tribal Areas have a separate legal system, the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR), which recognizes the doctrine of collective responsibility. Authorities are empowered to detain fellow members of a fugitive's tribe, or to blockade a fugitive's village, pending his surrender or punishment by his own tribe in accordance with local tradition (see Section 1.f.). The Government continued to exercise such authority during the year. In March 2000, two persons from Mullah Said village were arrested under the FCR following a shooting incident in which some persons from the village fired on residents of neighboring Badan village. The two later were released.

The police also have been known to detain persons as a result of personal vendettas. Following an August 2000 house robbery in a Christian neighborhood in Islamabad, police reportedly arrested residents of the neighborhood and extorted bribes from them in exchange for their release.

The law stipulates that detainees must be brought to trial within 30 days of their arrest. However, in many cases, trials do not start until 6 months after the filing of charges. In 1998 the HRCP estimated that there were almost as many individuals awaiting trial in jails as there were prisoners serving sentences. According to the chief justice of the Lahore High Court, there were more than 500,000 civil and criminal cases backlogged in the province's subordinate court system as of April 1999. In 1999 in 62 Lahore city courts, 7,000 prisoners were awaiting trial in 6,000 cases; in 3,500 of these cases, the police had not even brought a "challan," or indictment, to the court. Sindh Government officials reported in February 2000 that 11,945 of the 14,219 prisoners in Sindh jails were awaiting trial. The Government justified the creation of antiterrorist courts by citing the large number of murder and other cases that are clogging the regular court system (see Section 1.e.). The antiterrorist courts reportedly sentenced 32 persons to death and 15 persons to life imprisonment during 2000.

Persons in jail awaiting trial sometimes are held for periods longer than the sentence that they would receive if convicted. Court officials report that each judge reviews between 70 and 80 cases per day, but that action is taken on only 3 or 4 each week. According to the Pakistan Law Commission, as of September, there were 121,839 cases pending at the High Court level in Punjab, 127,019 in Sindh, 97,000 in NWFP, and 29,000 in Baluchistan. There were 10,515 cases pending in the Supreme Court as of September 30. According to the press, the Lahore High Court had 64,427 cases pending at year's end. Clogged lower courts exacerbate the situation; the majority of cases in the High Courts consist of appeals of lower court rulings. Once an appeal reaches the High Court, there are further opportunities for delay because decisions of individual judges frequently are referred to panels composed of two or three judges. There continued to be charges that magistrates and police, under pressure from provincial and federal officials to achieve high conviction rates, persuade detainees to plead guilty without informing them of the consequences. Senior government officials acknowledged during the year that this was a problem. Politically powerful persons also attempt to influence magistrates in their decisionmaking, sometimes threatening to transfer magistrates to other assignments.

In July 1999, press reports noted that hundreds of prisoners remained in the Karachi Central Prison after the completion of their sentences. The Sindh Home Department stated that at least 10 percent of prisoners awaiting trial in Karachi Central Prison had no access to free legal aid or the possibility of bail, even if qualified. Reporters interviewing male prisoners in one cellblock discovered that 16 percent of them were not represented by attorneys. As of March 1999, 6,000 cases awaited trial in 62 Lahore courts, with 7,000 prisoners awaiting a court date. In 3,500 of these cases, the police have not yet submitted a "challan," or indictment.

Asif Zardari, husband of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, has waited for more than 4 years for the start of his trial on charges of killing his brother-in-law, Murtaza Bhutto. Charges first were filed against Zardari in 1997 and transferred successively to two courts, where several judges refused to preside. By the end of 1999, only 2 of 223 witnesses had been heard. In April 1999, Zardari was tried and convicted separately on corruption charges. On April 6, the Supreme Court overturned his conviction on corruption charges. In December Zardari received bail but was not released; the NAB ordered his continued detention on suspicion of corruption.

The Government permits visits to prisoners and detainees by human rights monitors, family members, and lawyers (see Section 1.c.), with some restrictions. In some cases, authorities refuse family visits and, in some police stations, persons must to pay bribes to see a prisoner. Foreign diplomats may meet with prisoners when they appear in court, but generally are refused permission for prison visits. Local human rights activists report few restrictions to their access to prisons, even though the Government has continued to deny prison visits by the ICRC.

The Government sometimes used preventive detention, mass arrests, and excessive force to quell protests or civil unrest and to prevent political meetings. On a number of occasions, police arrested persons prior to demonstrations under the Criminal Procedures Code ban (see Section 2.b.). These arrests were carried out under Section 16 of the Maintenance of Public Order Act, which prohibits speech that "causes or is likely to cause alarm to the public." On January 10, police used batons against members and sympathizers of the All Faiths Spiritual Movement during a protest against the blasphemy laws (see Section 1.c.). Sixteen demonstrators were arrested.

In January five members of the pro-Nawaz Sharif faction of the Pakistan Muslim League claimed to have been detained by the Government for between 12 and 36 hours. They accused the Government of preventing them from attending an important meeting of their party's leadership. On January 31, police in Lahore arrested 29 female activists from the Pakistan Peoples Party, along with 6 children accompanying them. In such cases, female demonstrators usually are detained for only a few hours. In this case, while the children were released quickly, the protesters were held for over 1 week with ordinary criminals before their release. In late February, the police arrested approximately 500 SSP activists in Jhang and Faisalabad districts, after SSP activist Haq Nawaz Jhangvi was sentenced to death for his role in a killing in 1990 (see Section 5), in order to keep members of the extremist group SSP from protesting the sentence; most later were released. Between March 20 and 23, police detained 253 senior leaders and workers of the Alliance to Restore Democracy (ARD) to prevent them from attending an opposition rally in Lahore scheduled for March 23 (Pakistan Day). Some ARD leaders also reportedly were forced to leave Lahore prior to the rally. Persons who attempted to approach the site of the rally on March 23 were prevented from doing so by the police, who at times beat would-be participants. Half of the leaders and workers were released on April 2; the rest were released by mid-April. On April 27, the Government prevented several thousand members of a radical Islamic political group, Tehrik-e-Nifaze-Shariat Muhammadi (Movement for the Observance of Islamic Law), from holding a rally calling for Shari'a to be applied in Malakand division. On May 1, the Government sealed all ARD offices and arrested 479 ARD activists in Karachi to prevent any ARD political activity that day. Local government officials refused a request by representatives of the HRCP to visit the party activists that were detained. All but 29 of the ARD activists were released by May 31; the remaining 29 were released after serving 30-day sentences. Several hundred SSP and Tehrik-e-Jafria members were arrested in August; most reportedly were released within a few days or a few weeks.

The Government detained several high-profile businessmen in connection with President Musharraf's anticorruption campaign in 2000; however, there were no such arrests during the year. In May 2000, armed gunmen seized Amin Lakhani, a leading Karachi businessman. Several days later, the NAB admitted that it authorized Lakhani's seizure. Lakhani was held without charge for several weeks and questioned about his financial affairs. In May 2000, Lakhani's brother, Sultan Lakhani, also was seized and was released after several weeks of captivity.

During the year, 29 journalists reportedly were arrested. The police arrested approximately 150 journalists during a peaceful protest in April 2000. After September 11, several journalists attempting to travel into Afghanistan reportedly were detained.

Persons occasionally are detained arbitrarily because of disputes with powerful or well-connected persons. According to one NGO, during the year, a man named Shafiq was detained by the Joharabad police on charges of stealing the dog of an influential member of the community. He later was released after the intervention of community elders. The NGO asserts that the actual reason for Shafiq's arrest was his refusal to sell land at the request of the influential person.

The Musharraf Government detained without warrants and without charges several dozen political figures, military officers, government administrators, and Sharif family members following the 1999 coup. Many of the officials who were arrested following the coup were held incommunicado. At year's end, all of them had been released. Former Advisor for Sindh Affairs Ghous Ali Shah was released on bail on August 20 but remained under investigation for corruption. Former Petroleum Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan was released on August 22 and Former Minister of Finance Ishaq Dar was released on August 28. However, Mehtab Abbasi and Javed Hashmi, two senior politicians allied with Nawaz Sharif, were detained by the NAB during the year and remained in custody at year's end.

Several key figures among those initially arrested without charge, including former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, were held in connection with the "hijacking" in October 1999 of the civilian airliner carrying General Musharraf back from a conference in Sri Lanka; Nawaz Sharif reportedly denied permission for the plane to land in Karachi. This event, along with Sharif's summary replacement of General Musharraf with the Director General of the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, led to the 1999 coup. In the weeks following Sharif's arrest, he was detained without charge and denied access to counsel and family members. A First Incident Report was filed on November 10, 1999, which charged Sharif with attempted murder, hijacking, and criminal conspiracy. Former Sharif advisor Ghous Ali Shah, former Pakistan International Airlines chairman Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, former Director of Civil Aviation Aminullah Chaudhary, and former Inspector General of Police Rana Maqbool were charged along with Sharif. The accused were to be tried before an antiterrorist court. In November 1999, three other individuals--former Punjab chief minister Shahbaz Sharif, former senator Saifur Rehman, and former secretary to the Prime Minister Saeed Mehdi--were named codefendants in the case. Following Anti-Terrorist Act charges, the formal filing of charges against Nawaz Sharif occurred in December 1999. Sharif was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in April 2000 (see Section 1.e.). His six codefendants were acquitted; however, Saifur Rehman and Saeed Mehdi still were in custody at year's end on a maintenance of public order charge. In December 2000, the Government commuted former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's prison sentence and exiled him and 18 of his family members to Saudi Arabia for 10 years. The Government confiscated assets belonging to the Sharif family. They also had to agree to withdraw from politics while in exile. Some observers claimed that the Government exiled Sharif in order to remove him from politics and to reduce the power and influence of the opposition.

Many persons apprehended by the NAB (see Section 1.e.) remained in detention past the ordinance's stipulated 90 days detention without charge. Siddiq ul-Farooq, a former press secretary to Nawaz Sharif, was arrested under the NAB in October 1999 and held without charge until May 2000; he was released from custody during the year. In April 2000, Mian Manzoor Watoo, the former Punjab Chief Minister and head of his own PML faction, became the first senior politician to receive a jail term in a corruption case. In late 1999, MQM leader and former mayor of Karachi Dr. Farooq Sattar was arrested by order of the NAB, removed from his home, and held in an unfurnished cell. In July 2000, Sattar was convicted on a widely disputed corruption charge. Also in July 2000, former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was sentenced to 14 years' imprisonment and banned from holding political office on the basis of a corruption conviction. Most observers reported that Sharif's trial was fair; however, they believe the Government's decision to pursue the corruption case was politically motivated.

Hundreds of MQM activists and legislators (including former Sindh Minister of Labor Shoaib Bokhari) were arrested in 1998 and remained in custody at year's end; some of these activists are being held without charge. According to MQM officials, police have arrested more than 700 MQM officials during the past 3 years (see Section 1.c.). Some of these activists were released during the year. However, on April 19, the Government arrested MQM Senator Aftab Shaikh.

Women frequently are charged under the Hudood Ordinances for sexual misconduct, such as adultery. A Hudood law meant to deter false accusations is enforced weakly, and one human rights monitor claimed that 80 percent of adultery-related Hudood cases are filed without supporting evidence. In 1998 approximately one-third of the women in jails in Lahore, Peshawar, and Mardan were awaiting trial for adultery; that percentage likely remains accurate. Most women tried under the ordinance are acquitted, but the stigma of an adultery charge alone is severe. Men accused of rape sometimes are acquitted and released while their victims are held for adultery or fornication. The Commission of Inquiry for Women has recommended that the Hudood laws be repealed as they are based on an erroneous interpretation of Shari'a (see Section 5).

During 2000 authorities released from prison thousands of persons convicted of petty crimes who were being held despite the fact that their prison terms had expired. In January 2000, authorities released 12,000 prisoners convicted of petty crimes. In an October 2000 news report, a senior official in the Ministry of Interior stated that 47,000 persons who were jailed for minor offenses were released in 2000. The Punjab Department of Jails reportedly released 15,000 prisoners who were convicted of petty crimes in 2000. During the year, the Government released an undisclosed number of prisoners (estimated to be in the hundreds) to commemorate the Islamic holiday of Eid-ul-Azha.

Private jails exist in tribal and feudal areas. Human rights groups alleged that as many as 50 private jails, housing some 4,500 bonded laborers, were being maintained by landlords in lower Sindh (see Section 6.c.). Some prisoners reportedly have been held for many years. In the five districts of upper Sindh, landlords have defied the courts and police by holding tribal jirgas, which settle feuds, award fines, and even sentence persons to the death penalty in defiance of provincial laws. In January 2000, a newspaper reported that 56 landless agricultural workers escaped from a private jail in Sanghar district, Sindh. The landlord reportedly had forced them to work without wages for several years (see Section 6.c.). In March 2000, the Lahore High Court ordered the release of 24 brick kiln workers, including 10 women and children. According to press accounts, the laborers were kept in chains, were not compensated for their work, and were beaten frequently. Press reports indicate that there were similar numbers of bonded labors freed during the year.

e. Denial of Fair Public Trial

The suspended Constitution provided for an independent judiciary; however, in practice, the judiciary remains subject to executive branch and other outside influences, and despite the Musharraf Government's pledge to respect the independence of the judicial system, it has taken steps to control the judiciary and to remove the Government from judicial oversight. Provisional Constitution Order Number 1, issued in October 1999, provided that all courts functioning at the time of the coup would continue to operate, but that no court would have the power to issue orders against General Musharraf or any person exercising powers or jurisdiction under his authority. The decree effectively removed the actions of the Musharraf Government from judicial oversight. President Musharraf further undermined the independence of the judiciary when he ordered that all Supreme Court, Shari'a Court, and Provincial High Court justices take an oath to uphold the PCO that brought the military into power. Low salaries, inadequate resources, heavy workloads, corruption, and intimidation by political and religious pressure groups contributed to judicial inefficiency, particularly in the lower courts.

In January 2000, days before the Supreme Court was due to begin hearings on the legitimacy of the 1999 coup, President Musharraf ordered all Supreme Court, Shari'at court, and provincial High Court justices to take an oath committing themselves to uphold the PCO, which suspended the Constitution and legislative bodies and prohibited the superior courts from making any decision against the Chief Executive "or any person exercising powers or jurisdiction under his authority." Six Supreme Court justices, including the Chief Justice, and nine provincial High Court justices resigned in protest; however, 85 percent of the affected justices agreed to swear allegiance to the PCO. As a result of this decree, government directives and ordinances under the PCO no longer are subject to judicial review. Some government officials claimed that President Musharraf issued this decree due to concerns that judges were being bribed to rule against the Government in the court challenges to the military takeover. Many persons criticized this requirement, stating that it effectively ended the role of the judiciary as an independent body.

The judicial process continued to be impeded by bureaucratic infighting, inactivity, and the overlapping jurisdictions of the different court systems. Heavy backlogs that severely delayed the application of justice remained, due to scores of unfilled judgeships and to archaic and inefficient court procedures. The politicized appointment process held up the promotion of many lower court judges to the High Courts. Although the higher level judiciary is considered competent and generally honest, there were widespread reports of corruption among lower level magistrates and minor court functionaries. Nonetheless, the new Supreme Court at times demonstrated a limited degree of independence. For example, in May 2000, in a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court upheld the legality of the coup on the grounds of state necessity; however, the court ordered the Musharraf Government to hold national elections no later than 90 days after October 12, 2002. The decision also affirmed the Supreme Court's continued right of judicial review, ruled that it was legal for the Musharraf Government to amend the Constitution as long as the amendments do not change the basic character of the Constitution, and reserved the right to review the military's performance, the continued necessity of the Emergency Proclamation, and the PCO. Many observers criticized the Supreme Court decision as vague and contradictory. The Government respected this ruling during the year. On August 14, the Government announced that national and provincial elections were to take place between October 1 and October 11, 2002 (see Sections 2.b. and 3). In April the Supreme Court also modified several provisions of the NAB ordinance, and the Government respected the amended provisions during the year. Despite these decisions, the overall credibility of the judiciary remained low.

The judicial system involves several court systems with overlapping and sometimes competing jurisdictions. There are civil and criminal systems with special courts for banking, antinarcotics, and antiterrorist cases, as well as the federal Shariat court for certain Hudood offenses. The appeals process in the civil system is: Civil court, district court, High Court, and the Supreme Court. In the criminal system, the progression is magistrate, sessions court, High Court, and the Supreme Court.

The civil judicial system provides for an open trial, the presumption of innocence, cross-examination by an attorney, and appeal of sentences. Attorneys are appointed for indigents only in capital cases. There are no jury trials. Due to the limited number of judges, the heavy backlog of cases, lengthy court procedures, and political pressures, cases routinely take years, and defendants must make frequent court appearances. Cases start over when an attorney changes. Under both the Hudood and standard criminal codes, there are bailable and nonbailable offenses. According to the Criminal Procedures Code, the accused in bailable offenses must be granted bail, and those charged with nonbailable offenses should be granted bail if the alleged crime carries a sentence of less than 10 years. Many accused, especially well-connected persons who are made aware of impending warrants against them, are able to obtain prearrest bail, and thus are spared arrest and incarceration.

Double jeopardy applies to those convicted of possessing narcotics because of a federal Shariat court ruling that customs and narcotics cases be initiated separately. During the year, the Lahore High Court ordered the release of eight prisoners, including five foreign nationals, who had served their sentences under the Customs Act and were awaiting trial for a narcotics charge arising out of the same incident. The court noted that the law did not allow punishment twice for the same offense. A February 2000 ruling by the Lahore High Court forbidding a second trial was ignored by an April 2000 sessions court decision in Lahore, which sent the accused back to prison for the second time on the same narcotics conviction.

The judiciary has argued that it has failed to try and convict terrorist suspects in a timely manner because of poor police casework, prosecutorial negligence, and the resulting lack of evidence. In response to this problem, the Anti-Terrorist Act was passed; special antiterrorist courts began operations in 1997. The antiterrorist courts, designed for the speedy punishment of terrorist suspects, have special streamlined procedures; however, due to the continued intimidation of witnesses, police, and judges, the courts initially produced only a handful of convictions. Under the Act, terrorist killings are punishable by death and any act, including speech, intended to stir up religious hatred, is punishable by up to 7 years' rigorous imprisonment. Additional offenses that can be tried under the Anti-Terrorist Act include acts to outrage religious feelings; efforts to "wage war against the state;" conspiracy; acts committed in abetting an offense; and kidnaping of or abduction to confine a person. Cases are to be decided within 7 working days, but judges are free to extend the period of time as required. Trials in absentia initially were permitted, but later were prohibited. Appeals to an appellate tribunal also were required to take no more than 7 days, but appellate authority since has been restored to the High and Supreme Courts, under which these time limits do not apply. Under the Anti-Terrorist Act, bail is not to be granted if the court has reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is guilty. Many of the more controversial amendments to the Anti-Terrorist Act adopted under the Nawaz Sharif Government were not enforced during the year.

On June 20, the Musharraf Government approved an amendment to the Anti-Terrorist Act. The new ordinance defines terrorism as "the use or threat of action where the use, or threatened use, is designed to coerce and intimidate or overawe the Government or the public or a section of the public or community or sect or create a sense of fear or insecurity in society; and the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, ideological, or ethnic cause."

Leading members of the judiciary, human rights groups, the press, and politicians from a number of parties expressed strong reservations about the antiterrorist courts, charging that they constitute a parallel judicial system and could be used as tools of political repression. Government officials and police believed that the deterrent effect of the Act's death penalty provisions contributed to the reduction in sectarian violence after its passage. The antiterrorist courts also are empowered to try persons accused of particularly "heinous" crimes, such as gang rape and child killings, and several persons have been tried, convicted, and executed under these provisions. In 1997 cases filed under Section 295 (a) of the Penal Code, one of the so-called blasphemy laws (see Section 2.c.), were transferred to the antiterrorist courts. Human rights advocates feared that if blasphemy cases were tried in the antiterrorist courts, alleged blasphemers, who in the past normally were granted bail or released for lack of evidence, likely would be convicted, given the less stringent rules of evidence required under the Anti-Terrorist Act.

The Musharraf Government created by ordinance a special antiterrorist court in Sindh presided over by a High Court justice rather than a lower level judge, as is usually the case. The amended provision permits the High Court justice to "transfer...any case pending before any other special court...and try the case" in his court. Supporters of Nawaz Sharif maintained that these changes were designed to help the Musharraf Government prosecute Sharif. The trial of Nawaz Sharif and six codefendants on charges of hijacking was the most widely publicized case tried by an antiterrorist court. No cases tried by an antiterrorist court received similar publicity during the year. In April 2000, Sharif was found guilty of hijacking and terrorism and sentenced to two terms of life imprisonment (to be served consecutively), an unspecified fine, 5 years' rigorous imprisonment in lieu of nonpayment of the fine, forfeiture of all property, and a fine to compensate the 198 passengers and crew of the flight. The judge ruled that there was insufficient evidence to arraign Sharif on four offenses related to "waging war against the state" and criminal conspiracy; the charges were dropped. His six codefendants were found not guilty, and all six were released during the year.

Diplomatic observers who attended the Sharif trial concluded that the trial generally was fair, open, and transparent. The defendants were given free choice of and ready access to counsel. Diplomats and the media were granted free daily trial access and newspapers frequently reported on defense attorneys' criticism of President Musharraf and the army. Nawaz Sharif and his defense counsel expressed "full confidence" in the court. The prosecution appealed the codefendants' acquittals and Sharif's life sentences, arguing for the death penalty, and the defense appealed Sharif's conviction in the Sindh High Court in another trial that courtroom observers considered free and fair. In October 2000, the appeals court upheld Nawaz Sharif's convictions for hijacking and terrorism but combined them into one offense. The court also denied the prosecution appeal to upgrade Sharif's sentence to the death penalty, reduced the amount of property forfeiture, and affirmed the antiterrorism court's acquittals of the six codefendants.

The Musharraf Government in 1999 created by ordinance the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and special accountability courts to try corruption cases. The NAB was created in part to deal with as much as $4 billion (approximately PRs 208 billion) that is estimated to be owed to the country's banks (all of which are state-owned) by debtors, primarily from among the wealthy elite. The Musharraf Government stated that it would not target genuine business failures or small defaulters and does not appear to have done so. The NAB was given broad powers to prosecute corruption cases, and the accountability courts were expected to try such cases within 30 days. As originally promulgated, the ordinance prohibited courts from granting bail and gave the NAB chairman sole power to decide if and when to release detainees. In April the Supreme Court modified several provisions of the NAB ordinance. It reduced the NAB's freedom to hold suspects without charge from 90 days to 15 days, renewable with judicial concurrence. The maximum period of disqualification from political office pursuant to a corruption conviction was reduced from 21 years to 10 years, and the Court required that future appointments of key NAB officials receive the Chief Justice's concurrence.

The ordinance also allows those suspected by the State Bank of Pakistan of defaulting on government loans or of corrupt practices to be detained for 15 days without charge (renewable with judicial concurrence) and, prior to being charged, does not allow access to counsel. During 2000 many persons who were apprehended under the NAB ordinance remained in detention without charge for longer than 90 days (see Section 1.d.). In accountability cases, there is a presumption of guilt, and conviction under the ordinance can result in 14 years' imprisonment, fines, and confiscation of property. Those convicted also originally were disqualified from running for office or holding office for 10 years. In August 2000, the Government announced that persons with a court conviction would be barred from holding party office.

The Musharraf Government denied press reports that it had decided not to pursue accountability cases against active members of the military or the judiciary; however, no serving members of the military or the judiciary have been charged by the NAB. Nonetheless, in May former Chief of the Naval Staff Mansoor ul-Haq was charged with corruption under the NAB ordinance. In June 2000, the Government announced that NAB had arrested 132 persons to date; 82 persons were in detention, 53 of the 82 were held in judicial lockups, and 29 others were in the NAB's custody. During the year, Jehangir Badr, Chaudhary Pervez Elahi, Sheikh Rashid, Mehtab Abbasi, and Javed Hashmi were arrested by the NAB. A published list of persons charged with corruption by the NAB included former Prime Ministers Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto.

The Hudood ordinances criminalize nonmarital rape (see Section 5), extramarital sex (including adultery and fornication), and various gambling, alcohol, and property offenses. Offenses are distinguished according to punishment, with some offenses liable to Hadd, or Koranic, punishment (see Section 1.c.), and others to Tazir, or secular punishment. Although both types of cases are tried in ordinary criminal courts, special, more stringent rules of evidence apply in Hadd cases; Hadd punishments are mandatory if there is enough evidence to support them. Hadd punishments regarding sexual offences are most severe for married Muslims; for example, if a married Muslim man confesses to rape or there are four adult male Muslim witnesses to the act, the accused must be stoned to death; if the accused rapist is not Muslim or married, if he confesses, or if the act is witnessed by four adult males (not all Muslim), the accused must be sentenced to 100 lashes with a whip, and such other punishment, including death, as the court may deem fit. The testimony of four female witnesses, or that of a rape victim alone, is insufficient to impose Hadd punishments. If the evidence falls short of Hadd criteria, then the accused may be sentenced to a lesser class of penalties (Tazir). Since it is difficult to obtain sufficient evidence to support the Hadd punishments, most rape cases are tried at the Tazir level, under which sentences may be imposed up to 25 years in prison and 30 lashes. No Hadd punishment ever has been applied in the more than 20 years that the Hudood ordinances have been in force. For Tazir punishments, there is no distinction between Muslim and non-Muslim offenders. Under Tazir the evidentiary requirement for financial or future obligations is for two male witnesses or one male and two female witnesses; in all other matters, the court may accept the testimony of one man or one woman (see Section 5).

The federal Shariat court and the Shari'a bench of the Supreme Court serve as appellate courts for certain convictions in criminal court under the Hudood ordinances. The federal Shariat court also may overturn any legislation judged to be inconsistent with the tenets of Islam. However, these cases may be appealed to the Shari'a bench of the Supreme Court. In two areas of the NWFP--Malakand and Kohistan--the Government in 1999 announced plans to implement Shari'a law by regulation and by ordinance, respectively. In September 1999, the NWFP assembly passed a bill that incorporated the Kohistan ordinance into law (see Section 2.c.). In May 2000, the governor of the NWFP reportedly affirmed to the media his plan to implement Shari'a in Malakand division. However, no information was given as to when the plan would enter into force. The Government made no effort to enforce its commitments during the year, despite renewed demonstrations advocating the implementation of Shari'a law in May.

Appeals of certain Hudood convictions involving penalties in excess of 2 years' imprisonment are referred exclusively to the Shariat courts and are heard jointly by Islamic scholars and High Court judges using ordinary criminal procedures. Judges and attorneys must be Muslim and must be familiar with Islamic law. Within these limits, defendants in a Shariat court are entitled to the lawyer of their choice. There is a system of bail.

The Penal Code incorporates the doctrines of Qisas (roughly, an eye for an eye) and Diyat (blood money). Qisas is not known to have been invoked; however, Diyat occasionally is applied, particularly in the NWFP, in place of judicial punishment of the wrongdoer. Only the family of the victim, not the State, may pardon the defendant. The Hudood, Qisas, and Diyat ordinances apply to ordinary criminal courts and Shariat courts. According to Christian activists, if a Muslim kills a non-Muslim, he can redress the crime by paying Diyat to the victim's family; however, a non-Muslim who kills a Muslim does not have the option of paying and must serve a jail sentence or face the death penalty for his crime. Failure to pay Diyat in noncapital cases can result in indefinitely extended incarceration, under Section 331 of the Diyat ordinance. Some persons remain in prison after completion of their terms for failure to pay Diyat.

Administration of justice in the FATA normally is the responsibility of tribal elders and maliks, or leaders. They may conduct hearings according to Islamic law and tribal custom. In such proceedings, the accused have no right to legal representation, bail, or appeal. The usual penalties consist of fines, even for murder. However, the Government's political agents, who are federal civil servants assigned to tribal agencies, oversee such proceedings and may impose prison terms of up to 14 years. Paramilitary forces under the direction of the political agents frequently conduct punitive actions during enforcement operations. For example, in raids on criminal activities, the authorities have damaged surrounding homes as extrajudicial punishment of residents for having tolerated nearby criminal activity (see Section 1.f.).

In remote areas outside the jurisdiction of federal political agents, tribal councils occasionally levy harsher, unsanctioned punishments, including flogging or death by shooting or stoning. On July 16, the HRCP reported the execution by tribal leaders of an Afghan man accused of murder. The tribesmen reportedly condemned the accused without due process and executed him by blindfolding him and shooting him in front of a crowd. The Government has made no efforts to investigate the incident, and is unlikely to do so.

Another related form of rough justice operating in the NWFP, particularly in the tribal areas, is the concept of Pakhtunwali, or the Pakhtun Tribal Code, in which revenge is an important element. Under this code, a man, his family, and his tribe are obligated to take revenge for wrongs--either real or perceived--to redeem their honor. More often than not, these disputes arise over women and land, and frequently result in violence (see Section 5).

Several senior officials in the judiciary participated in an Asian Development Bank-funded judicial reform program that began in April; the program was designed to improve the quality of the lower level judiciary. In December several local courts reported minor improvements due to the reforms, such as a faster rate of processing cases.

There are limited numbers of political prisoners; there probably were less than 50 political prisoners in custody at year's end. Sections of the Penal Code directly target members of the Ahmadi faith; according to Ahmadi sources, approximately 200 Ahmadis have been incarcerated under these provisions since their inception. Several minority religious groups argue that other sections of the Penal Code--particularly the related blasphemy laws--are used in a discriminatory fashion by local officials or private individuals to punish religious minorities. In April 2000, the Government announced its intention to require that deputy commissioners review all blasphemy cases prior to the filing of a FIR; however, the Government reversed this decision in May 2000 due to intense pressure from some Islamic groups (see Section 2.c.). The Government took no steps to amend the blasphemy laws during the year (see Section 2.c.).

Some political groups also argue that they are marked for arrest based on their political affiliation (see Section 1.d.). The MQM in particular has argued that the Government used antiterrorist court convictions in Sindh to silence its activists.

The Government permits visits to prisoners by human rights monitors, family members, and lawyers.

f. Arbitrary Interference With Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence

The Government infringes on citizens' privacy rights. The Anti-Terrorist Act allowed police or military personnel acting as police to enter and to search homes and offices without search warrants, and to confiscate property or arms likely to be used in an alleged terrorist act (which is defined very broadly). This provision never was tested in the courts. While the Anti-Terrorist Act was suspended partially in 1998, the Government promulgated new antiterrorist ordinances in October 1998, April 1999, and in August. The purpose of the newest ordinance is to strengthen the power of the judiciary to prosecute terrorism cases. Under the ordinances, many blasphemy cases now are tried by antiterrorist courts. By law the police need a warrant to search a home, but not to search a person. Despite this law, police have entered homes without a warrant and sometimes stole valuables during searches. In the absence of a warrant, a policeman is subject to charges of criminal trespass. However, police seldom are punished for illegal entry.

The Government maintains several domestic intelligence services that monitor politicians, political activists, suspected terrorists, and suspected foreign intelligence agents. Credible reports indicate that the authorities routinely use wiretaps and intercept and open mail. In 1997 the Supreme Court directed the Government to seek its permission before carrying out wiretapping or eavesdropping operations; however, the judiciary's directive has been ignored widely. No action was taken during the year on the case of 12 government agencies accused of tapping and monitoring citizens' phone calls, which has been pending since 1996, and no additional action the case was expected.

Provincial governments sometimes forcibly moved landless laborers from their temporary camps. For example, in October 2000 local government officials forcibly moved 900 persons who had been freed from bonded labor from their temporary camps in Sikandarabad in Kotri district.

Civil marriages do not exist; marriages are performed and registered according to one's religion. Upon conversion to Islam, the marriages of Jewish or Christian men remain legal; however, upon conversion to Islam, the marriages of Jewish or Christian women, or of other non-Muslims, that were performed under the rites of the previous religion are considered dissolved (see Section 2.c.).

While the Government generally does not interfere with the right to marry, the Government on occasion assists influential families to prevent marriages they oppose. For example, in July 1999, police in Mirpurkas District, Sindh, raided the home of Javed Dal, who had eloped with his cousin, and arrested his family members as hostages. His wife's father, Somar Dal, used his influence as a member of the Sindh National Front Executive Committee to instigate the arrests, which were carried out without warrants. The Government also fails to prosecute vigorously cases in which families punish members (generally women) for marrying or seeking a divorce against the wishes of other family members. During the year, Kausar of Tala Gang, District Chakwal, and Tahira of Simly Dam, District Islamabad were attacked physically by their families, according to a local NGO. In June 2000, Mumlikat Bibi was killed in her parents' home in the village of Yar Hussain in the NWFP. Her father, who reportedly opposed Bibi's efforts to choose a spouse without parental consent, was accused of being the culprit (see Section 5); his trial was ongoing at year's end.

The Frontier Crimes Regulation, the separate legal system in the FATA, permits collective responsibility, and empowers the authorities to detain innocent members of the suspect's tribe, or blockade an entire village (see Section 1.d.). In past years, the Government demolished the homes of several alleged criminals, as well as the homes of those who reportedly tolerated nearby criminal activity. During the year, the authorities in several Federally Administered Tribal Areas reported that tribal councils ordered the demolition of up to a few dozen homes. In December 1999, a Shariat court established by the Tehrik-i-Tulaba, an extremist group in Orakzai Tribal Agency, fined six alleged accomplices to a killing, and burned down their homes as punishment.

Section 2 Respect for Civil Liberties, Including:

a. Freedom of Speech and Press

The suspended Constitution provided for freedom of speech and of the press, and citizens generally are free to discuss public issues; however, some journalists practice a degree of self-censorship. The Musharraf Government did not attempt to exercise direct control over views expressed in the print media. Newspaper editorials and commentators increasingly are critical of the Government; however, direct criticism of the military and judiciary is rare. Following the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States, the Ministry of Information directed the media to avoid direct criticism of the United States or of the Government's cooperation in combating terrorism. However, despite restrictions imposed on the electronic media, foreign journalists operating in the country were permitted to broadcast stories without obtaining prior clearance from the Ministry of Information (unlike in the past). Investigative journalism is rare; instead, the press acts freely to publish charges and countercharges by named and unnamed parties and individuals representing competing political and social interests. Both governmental and nongovernmental entities sometimes pay for favorable media coverage.

Prior to the 1999 coup, any person deemed to have damaged the Constitution, including the publication of statements against the spirit of the Constitution, could be prosecuted for treason. However, prosecutions under this provision were rare. The suspended Constitution also prohibited the ridicule of Islam, the armed forces, or the judiciary. The Penal Code mandates the death sentence for anyone defiling the name of the Prophet Mohammad, life imprisonment for desecrating the Koran, and up to 10 years in prison for insulting another's religious beliefs with the intent to outrage religious feelings (see Section 2.c.). The Anti-Terrorist Act stipulates imprisonment with rigorous labor for up to 7 years for using abusive or insulting words, or possessing or distributing written or recorded material, with the intent to stir up sectarian hatred. No warrant is required to seize such material.

In March 2000, police in Hyderabad registered criminal cases against Kulsoom Nawaz and 15 other PML leaders for making "provocative" speeches at a party convention held the previous day. No further action was taken on these cases during the year.

In August the Government amended the Anti-Terrorist Act to ban the extremist Lashkar-i-Jhangvi and the Sipah-e-Mohammad (see Sections 2.b. and 2.c.); the amendments also made any person who printed, published, or disseminated any material from these organizations subject to 6 months' imprisonment.

Publications and journalists can be charged under the blasphemy laws for insulting the religion of others or for directly or indirectly defiling the Prophet Mohammad or the Koran (see Section 2.c.).

Provincial and local governments occasionally arrested journalists and closed newspapers accused of printing offensive material, but this was not a widespread practice. On January 29, the Government closed the Frontier Post, an English-language daily based in Peshawar, and arrested five members of its staff after the Frontier Post published a letter to the editor that contained derogatory characterizations of the Prophet Mohammad. Most of the staff later were released on bail, and the paper was permitted to reopen after a period of several months. However, the paper's presses were burned by a mob on January 30, reportedly while the police stood by and did little to stop it. On June 4, local authorities in Abbotabad, NWFP, sealed the office and printing press of Mohasib, a local daily, and arrested the newspaper's resident editor, shift manager, and sub-editor under section 295(c), one of the blasphemy laws. The authorities accused the newspaper of committing blasphemy by having published an article arguing that it is not compulsory in Islam for men to grow beards. Local government officials defied an order from the provincial government to release the newspaper employees stating that such a move would spark unrest. On October 6, all of those arrested were released and Mohasib was permitted to resume publication.

The State no longer publishes daily newspapers; however, the Ministry of Information controls and manages the country's primary wire service, the Associated Press of Pakistan (APP). The APP is both the Government's own news agency and the official carrier of international news to the local media. The few small privately owned wire services usually are circumspect in their coverage of sensitive domestic news and tend to follow a government line.

Privately owned newspapers freely discuss public policy and criticize the Government. They report remarks made by opposition politicians, and their editorials reflect a wide spectrum of views. Local police, political parties, ethnic, sectarian, and religious groups, militant student organizations, and occasionally commercial interests exert undue pressure on newspapers to carry their statements or press releases. Such pressure is a common feature of journalism; among extreme groups it can include physical violence, the sacking of offices, the intimidation or beating of journalists, and interference with the distribution of newspapers. In July the Bureau Chief of the Hyderabad newspaper Ummat, Abdul Hafeez Abid, was attacked and injured by armed assailants while leaving his office. On December 8, approximately 12 persons, 6 of whom carried guns, beat 2 members of the staff of Ummat; they also destroyed office equipment. The motive for these attacks remained unknown at year's end. A police investigation of the Ummat incidents was ongoing at year's end. At times landlords and their agents, who have become accustomed to terrorizing with impunity the ordinary citizens living on their lands, retaliate against journalists who report on their actions. Journalists working in remote areas can expect more difficulties from local authorities and influential individuals than their urban counterparts. However, violence against and intimidation of journalists is a nationwide problem.

The Government occasionally denies visas to journalists who are from India or are of Indian descent.

The broadcast media are mainly government monopolies directed by the Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation and Pakistan Television (PTV). Domestic news coverage and public affairs programming on these media are controlled closely by the Government and traditionally reflect its views. One private radio station, one television broadcaster, and a semi-private cable television station are licensed under special contractual arrangements with the Government. The semi-private television station, Shalimar Television Network (STN), occasionally has been closed due to disputes with the Ministry of Information and to financial difficulties. None of these stations is permitted to produce news and public affairs programming; the private television station rebroadcasts or simulcasts the regular PTV evening news. The Shalimar Television Network also rebroadcasts PTV news, in addition to current affairs programming from foreign broadcasters, such as the British Broadcasting Corporation. While the STN routinely censors those segments considered to be socially or sexually offensive, rarely, if ever, are foreign news stories censored for content. The Ministry of Information exercises some influence over broadcasting by restricting government advertising. It also monitors advertising on all broadcast media, editing or removing advertisements deemed morally objectionable.

In 1999 the Secretary for Information was quoted in the press as stating that additional private television and radio channels would soon be licensed, echoing a pledge made by President Musharraf. However, by year's end, no such licenses had been granted. Satellite dishes readily are available on the local market and are priced within reach of almost everyone with a television set--well into the lower-middle classes. South Asian satellite channels (usually India-based) have become important sources of news and popular entertainment.

The competitive nature of politics helps to ensure press freedom since the media often serve as a forum for political parties, commercial, religious, and various other interests to vie with and criticize each other publicly. Although the press rarely criticizes Islam as such, leaders of religious parties and movements are not exempt from public scrutiny and criticism. After September 11, several newspapers published letters to the editor that were critical of religious parties that continued to express support for the Taliban. Sufi Mohammad, the leader of a prominent political Islamic group, was criticized for his role in encouraging teenage boys to fight for the Taliban.

The press traditionally has avoided negative coverage of the armed forces, and the Office of Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) has held press coverage of military matters under close restraint. Officially the ISPR closely controls and coordinates the release of military news and access to military sources. In the past, detailed public discussion of the military as an institution was hampered severely since any published discussion, let alone criticism, of the defense budget was proscribed by law. However, after the 1999 coup, journalists reported no attempts by the ISPR agencies to influence editorial content. In 1997 the code of silence was undermined to a limited degree when a National Assembly committee discussed defense appropriations and corruption in defense contracts in open session, thereby making possible (and legal) newspaper coverage of defense appropriations and corruption in defense contracts. Discussion of the defense budget continued during the year, especially in the English-language press. Personnel changes among senior army officers also were discussed widely in the press, and newspapers published calls for extending the accountability process to include former military officers. In May the press gave extensive coverage to the arrest of former Chief of the Naval Staff Mansoor ul-Haq on corruption charges. Although many journalists chose to exercise self-censorship regarding the military during the year, the Government permitted significant criticism of retired military officials. President Musharraf was the subject of intense and public criticism during the year.

Government leaks are not uncommon, but are managed carefully, and often are made to underpaid journalists who are on the unofficial payrolls of competing interests. Reports of intimidation, heavy-handed surveillance, and legal action to quiet the unduly curious or nondeferential reporter were common in the past, but these reports have declined significantly since the coup. However, during the year, 29 journalists were arrested. The Government has considerable leverage over the press through its substantial budget for advertising and public interest campaigns and its ability to enforce regulations. Human rights groups, journalists, and opposition figures accused the Government of attempting to silence journalists and public figures; however, there had been fewer such complaints since the coup. In July 2000, the Government ended its monopoly of newsprint supply and did not initiate new efforts to collect back taxes from selected newspapers. In August 2000, the Government announced a draft ordinance for freedom of information, which would require every government office to designate a freedom of information officer who would be responsible for providing replies to written applications within 21 days. However, the act excludes all classified documents and does not define what constitutes classified information. By year's end, this ordinance had not been enacted. In December 2000, the Government declassified the Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report, which criticizes the conduct of political and military leaders during the 1971 war with India.

On March 28, unknown assailants attacked a prominent journalist, Shakil Shaikh, while he was driving his car in Islamabad. Shaikh was detained for several hours, severely beaten, and then released. No one has claimed responsibility and police officials have yet to identify any suspects.

In early October, Abu Bakar Siddique, a freelance journalist reporting on the influx of Afghan refugees into the country, was detained by the Government without charge and remained incommunicado as of mid-October. The Government also reportedly prevented some foreign journalists from entering Afghan refugee camps for a brief period in late September and early October. According to press reports, in November two British journalists were expelled, allegedly for being involved in activities that defamed the country.

According to one NGO, journalist Hayat Ullah, who worked for the newspaper Ausaf, was warned by a Political Agent in the FATA not to publish any more stories that showed the weakness of the local administration, ordered to apologize, and ordered to submit future articles to the authorities for approval. In June Ullah began to report on local tribal clashes without official approval. On July 5, Ullah was threatened with arrest, and on July 24, he was notified that his arrest was imminent. Ullah reportedly went into hiding. An arrest warrant under the Frontier Crimes Regulation reportedly was made out against him. On July 26, a relative of Ullah's was arrested and told he would be released only after Ullah turned himself in. Ullah's relative was released after local protests against his detention.

Foreign books must pass government censors before being reprinted. Books and magazines may be imported freely, but likewise are subject to censorship for objectionable sexual or religious content. In September the Government censored an article in Newsweek magazine concerning the case of Dr. Younis Shaikh, who was arrested on blasphemy charges in October 2000 and sentenced to death in August (see Section 2.c.). However, the Government permitted the publication of the same article in a Pakistani magazine.

Dance performances, even classical performances, are subject to protest by certain religious groups. Obscene literature, a category broadly defined by the Government, is subject to seizure. Dramas and documentaries on previously taboo subjects, including corruption, social privilege, narcotics, violence against women, and female inequality, are broadcast on television; however, some sensitive series have been canceled before being broadcast.

The Government generally respects academic freedom. The atmosphere of violence and intolerance fostered by student organizations, typically tied to political parties, continued to threaten academic freedom, despite the fact that a 1992 Supreme Court ruling prohibits student political organizations on campuses. On some university campuses, well-armed groups of students, primarily from radical religious organizations, have armed clashes with and intimidate other students, instructors, and administrators over issues such as language, syllabus contents, examination policies, grades, doctrines, and dress. These groups frequently facilitate cheating on examinations, interfere with the hiring of staff, control who is admitted to the universities, and sometimes also control the funds of the institutions. Such control generally is achieved through a combination of protest rallies, control of the campus media, and threats of mass violence. At Punjab University, the student wing of the political party Jaamat-i-Islami (a conservative Islamic group) has attempted to impose its self-defined code of conduct on teachers and students by threatening to foment unrest on campus if its demands are not met.

b. Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association

The suspended Constitution provided for freedom "to assemble peacefully and without arms subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of public order;" however, while the Government until March 2000 generally permitted peaceful assembly, it later imposed significant restrictions on this right. Since 1984 Ahmadis have been prohibited from holding any conferences or gatherings (see Section 2.c.). Throughout the year, the Government occasionally interfered with large rallies, which were held by all political parties. In March 2000, the Musharraf Government enacted an ordinance banning all public political gatherings, processions, and strikes held outdoors. Government officials claimed that the ban was enacted as a safety measure for the visit of an official head of state; however, the ban remained in place at year's end, although the Government stated in August that it would lift the ban 90 days before national elections which are to take place no later than October 12, 2002. During the year, the ban was enforced unevenly. Some groups circumvented the ban by meeting in private homes while using loudspeakers to carry the proceedings to supporters outdoors. The Government approved some public political gatherings, including a meeting in March of those Pakistan Muslim League members willing to reject publicly former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif as their party leader. During the first half of April, the Government permitted a 3-day conference organized by the Deobandi Muslim political party Jamiat-Ulema-Islami (JUI). Several speakers at the conference made anti-Western political declarations. On September 14, the HRCP published a complaint on behalf of 150 teachers in Lahore who were charged by police with batons for holding a rally to protest their grievances against the Government.

District magistrates occasionally exercised their power under the Criminal Procedures Code to ban meetings of more than four persons where demonstrations seemed likely to result in violence. During the year, police made preventive arrests of political party organizers prior to announced demonstrations (see Section 1.d.). For example, between March 20 and 23, police arrested senior leaders and hundreds of workers of the Alliance to Restore Democracy to prevent them from attending a rally in Lahore scheduled for March 23 (Pakistan Day). They were released after being held for up to 1 month. On April 27, the Government prevented several thousand members of an Islamist group, Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat Muhammadi from holding a rally calling for imposition of Shari'a law in Malakand division. Hundreds of party workers affiliated with the Alliance to Restore Democracy were arrested in Karachi in an attempt to prevent a political rally on May 1. Most were released after several days of detention.

The MQM has been harassed in its regular political activities, especially by the Sindh police. Police frequently arrested PML leaders and supporters in order to prevent planned demonstrations during the year; the HRCP noted that all public PML demonstrations in Karachi were prevented, except for meetings at the party's headquarters (see Section 1.d.). On April 18, police arrested approximately 200 MQM and Jiye Sindh Qaumi Mahaz (JSQM, a Sindhi nationalist political party) members during a day of sometimes violent demonstrations (up to 30 vehicles reportedly were set on fire) to protest the interdiction of a peaceful rally on April 16.

In August 1999, the Sharif Government issued an ordinance related to the antiterrorist courts (see Section 1.e.). One section of the ordinance made "illegal strikes, go-slows, (or) lock outs" punishable by up to 7 years' imprisonment and a fine. A wide spectrum of opposition groups opposed this measure, fearing that it would be used to silence legitimate dissent. The antiterrorist courts did not invoke this ordinance during the year or in 2000.

Police sometimes used excessive force against demonstrators. On January 10, police used batons against members and sympathizers of the All Faiths Spiritual Movement during a protest against the blasphemy laws. Sixteen demonstrators were arrested. One protester later acknowledged that police initiated the crackdown only after issuing several verbal warnings ordering the protesters to disperse (see Section 1.c.).

The authorities sometimes prevented leaders of politico-religious parties from traveling to certain areas if they believed their presence would increase sectarian tensions or cause public violence (see Section 2.d.).

The suspended Constitution provided for freedom of association subject to restriction by government ordinance and law; however, the Government limited this right in practice. NGO's are required to register with the Government under the "Cooperative Societies and Companies" Ordinance of 1960. NGO's usually register through the Ministry of Social Welfare and must submit to a 6-month probationary period during which the Government tracks their activities. NGO's are required to submit a progress report after the completion of this period, and then they are registered formally. No prominent NGO reported problems with the Government over registrations during the year.

Beginning in midyear, the Government undertook a major effort to curb religious extremism. On August 14, the Musharraf Government banned two small extremist sectarian organizations, the Lashkar-i-Jhangvi and Sipah-e-Mohammad, which had committed acts of anti-Shi'a or anti-Sunni violence in the past (see Section 2.c.).

c. Freedom of Religion

The suspended Constitution provided for freedom of religion, and stated that adequate provisions shall be made for minorities to profess and practice their religions freely; however, the Government limits freedom of religion. The country is an Islamic republic in which approximately 95 percent of the population is Muslim. The majority of the population is Sunni Muslim, but an estimated 15 percent of the population is Shi'a. The suspended Constitution required that laws be consistent with Islam and imposed some elements of Koranic law on both Muslims and religious minorities. In July 2000, President Musharraf amended the PCO in order to incorporate the Islamic provisions of the suspended Constitution, which include the definition of "Muslim" and "non-Muslim" and procedures regarding Shariat courts. While there is no law establishing the Koranic death penalty for apostates (those who convert from Islam), social pressure against apostasy is so powerful that most such conversions take place in secret. Reprisals and threats of reprisals against suspected converts are common. Members of religious minorities are subject to violence and harassment, and police at times refuse to prevent such actions or to charge persons who commit them.

All citizens, regardless of their religious affiliation, are subject to certain provisions of Shari'a. In the Malakand division and the Kohistan district of the NWFP, ordinances require that "all cases, suits, inquiries, matters, and proceedings in the courts shall be decided in accordance with Shari'a." These ordinances define Shari'a as the injunctions fou