FROM PAGE 12

The report also found no legal justification for the disappearances. International law prohibits enforced disappearances under any circumstance, including during states of emergency.

Claims that rogue officers acted alone were similarly rejected.

Victims reported consistent methods of abduction, detention, and interrogation, often in facilities near senior officials’ offices, making it implausible they were unaware. The operations required careful planning and coordination among the military, police, and intelligence agencies, said the report.

The commission also found clear evidence of inter-agency communication in transferring detainees between facilities.

These were organised, state-sponsored actions, not random acts of misconduct, it said.

Evidence indicates that enforced disappearances targeted opposition members, activists, and government critics rather than individuals involved in terrorism, the Commission said. It added that many incidents occurred during elections or periods of political unrest, suggesting political suppression rather than national security concerns as the primary motive.

The report warned that these practices have increased social instability, leaving released victims with deep psychological and emotional scars, which have been exploited by extremist groups.

MILITARY LAW VS CIVILIAN COURTS

Some military officials have argued that allegations against military personnel should be addressed under military law rather than through civilian courts.

However, the Commission rejected this, highlighting the inadequacies of the Army Act, 1952, specifically for two reasons.

“First, the Army Act does not recognise enforced disappearance or abduction as criminal offences, nor does it provide for superior or command responsibility. The omission is not merely technical: the Army Act is structurally incapable of addressing the gravity, systemic nature, and leadership accountability inherent in enforced disappearance,” read the report.

“Second, the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973 not only recognises enforced disappearance as a crime against humanity and expressly provides for the responsibility of superiors, it also contains a non obstante clause in Section 26, giving it overriding effect over any conflicting law.”

The Commission also found that military-led investigations have failed to hold perpetrators accountable.

For example, an internal military inquiry into Brigadier Azmi’s abduction was disbanded without resolution, and the evidence was destroyed, demonstrating the military’s failure to ensure accountability.