Pakistani anti-terrorism court issued an unprecedented sentence against a senior leader of Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP), Javid Shahzad, for issuing threats against former Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa. This ruling marks an important turning point in an already high-profile case involving judiciary, political extremism and rule of law issues.
Court proceedings demonstrate the conviction for public speeches and statements where TLP leader Mamdouh Isa made statements that threatened violence against then Chief Justice Isa, as well as incited followers against state institutions. Prosecutors contended that these threats went beyond political rhetoric to comprise real threats that endangered public safety and undermined constitutional authority.
The court found the accused guilty under multiple provisions of Pakistan’s Anti-Terrorism Act and several sections of Pakistan Penal Code related to criminal intimidation, hate speech and incitement to violence. His cumulative sentence exceeded 35 years, reflecting both the seriousness of his charges as well as their impact on law and order.
At trial, prosecutors provided video recordings, transcripts of speeches and witness testimony to support their claim that statements made intentionally, repeatedly and publicly with the aim of inflaming hostility toward the judiciary were deliberately made and intended to provoke hostility toward it. Defense lawyers claimed these expressions were political speech protected under freedom of speech but this argument was dismissed by the court who stated that constitutional rights do not cover calls for violence.
In its written verdict, the court emphasized the significance of protecting judges and state officials from intimidation. According to its ruling, threats to judges’ heads run counter to democratic governance; threats cannot be tolerated within constitutional systems. While criticism of institutions is permissible under this system; intimidation, coercion or incitement go beyond legal boundaries and should not be allowed.
Pakistan’s political and legal circles have reacted strongly to the sentencing, with supporters hailing it as an essential step to protect judicial independence and deter extremist rhetoric. Legal experts note that it sends a strong signal that threats against judges will result in severe retaliatory measures regardless of political affiliation.
TLP representatives and some supporters have voiced displeasure with this decision, calling it excessive and politically driven. They fear it could further divide society while restricting political expression. Authorities, however, have encouraged calm by emphasizing that their verdict was reached according to due process and was determined based on evidence presented at trial.
Qazi Faez Isa has not issued any public remarks regarding his sentencing. Government officials have reiterated their commitment to protecting judges, journalists and public servants from intimidation; as recent years have shown an increase in threats directed against state institutions.
Pakistan’s judiciary and law enforcement agencies have recently undertaken efforts to combat hate speech and extremist narratives that contribute to violent extremism. Analysts suggest this verdict may set an important precedent in how courts handle similar cases involving threats against high-ranking officials.
As appeals are expected, this case will likely remain prominent. Thus far, one of the harshest sentences issued against threats made against judicial institutions remains on hold, further underscoring accountability’s relevance even in politically contentious contexts.