Patchwork or reformed justice?
Selective morality does not make for sound legislation. That, unfortunately, is what Pakistan's latest move to curtail the death penalty seems to embody. In a bid to retain GSP+ trade concessions from the EU, the Senate of Pakistan has passed a bill that abolishes capital punishment for harbouring hijackers and for the public stripping of women — two serious offences — while leaving more than a hundred others untouched.
This piecemeal amendment reeks of convenience rather than conviction. It appears designed to tick boxes for international partners rather than reflect any meaningful shift in the state's approach to justice or human rights. No broader framework has been presented to justify why certain crimes merit the death penalty while others do not. Instead, the government has opted for selective rollback without a principled foundation.
Criticism from both treasury and opposition benches in the Senate points to this very disconnect. PTI's Barrister Ali Zafar equated the public stripping of a woman with murder, arguing that such crimes warrant the harshest possible punishment. Senator Samina Mumtaz Zehri cautioned that lighter sentences in such cases may embolden criminals rather than deter them. There is merit in these concerns — not necessarily because the death penalty is the answer, but because the reform itself lacks depth and cohesion.
If capital punishment is to be curtailed, it must be done with a comprehensive review of all offences that currently carry the sentence, followed by a national debate on what constitutes a "most serious crime". The removal of the death penalty for just two offences, without a broader review of Pakistan's capital punishment regime, reflects an ad hoc approach that neither satisfies moral imperatives nor strengthens the justice system.
It only deepens the confusion. Eventually, lawmakers must consider the role of capital punishment in a modern justice system and within the context of Pakistan's socio-economic paradigm, through proper consultation with legal and human rights experts.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
10 minutes ago
- Express Tribune
Tariff threat forces EU to hedge bets
Listen to article Barely months into Donald Trump's return to power, America's global standing has been bleeding credibility at a staggering pace, forcing many nations to prepare for a post-American world as tariff theatrics rattle the world. The American president's decision to impose a sweeping 30% tariff on EU exports has ruptured the fragile scaffolding of trust that long upheld the US-EU relationship. Although Europe has repeatedly aligned itself with Washington, often to the bewilderment of its own citizens, it appears to be showing signs of hedging its bets. EU allies, long and strangely willing to toe the American line on so-called "common" security and economic interests, are beginning to scramble for cover from Washington's whims, as the facade of shared purpose wears thin. The push for self-reliance is beginning to forge a rare moment of cohesion in the EU, finding an alternative to the disunity that marked the Brexit years. The shift was plain when European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, while signing a cooperation pledge with Japan recently, remarked that the EU was now seeking "more reliable partners" to counter economic coercion and unfair trade practices — a barbed formulation that conspicuously sidesteps the US. Timing, too, is everything. The EU has yet to clinch a free trade deal with Washington, and the sudden tariff spike has landed like a hammer blow amid delicate negotiations with a looming deadline set by Washington. However, Europe's response is not simply reactive. European officials warned that such a tariff would "practically prohibit" transatlantic trade and inflict deep damage on economies that export over 20% of their goods to the US, with Germany alone sending over $174.5 billion worth of products in 2024. Brussels activated a first wave of counter-tariffs, suspended only until August 6, covering €21 billion of US goods. A second package, initially targeting €95 billion, was whittled down through fierce internal lobbying to €72 billion, sparing items like diagnostic reagents, semiconductor-manufacturing machines and key medical devices deemed too critical to Europe's own supply chains. Anti-Coercion Instrument Meanwhile, EU diplomats quietly dusted off their most potent, never-used tool: the Anti-Coercion Instrument (ACI). Designed in 2023 to deter economic blackmail, the ACI can impose duties, quotas, investment restrictions and limits on public procurement against any country that "coerces" EU members. Where WTO courts have failed, the mechanism allows qualified majority action — 15 states representing 65% of the EU population — circumventing the need for unanimity. Analysts observe that just floating the ACI sends a powerful signal: Europe is done being a passive victim of trade bullying. Germany, once cautious about escalation, now publicly supports considering the ACI. France has long championed it. Even Italy's far-right leadership, initially tipped to cosy up to Trump, has resisted side deals and endorsed a firm, collective stance. The recent EU-Japan pledge to deepen cooperation was one sign of the recalibration. So too is the EU's intensified internal debate over "strategic autonomy", a term that gained currency after Trump's earlier attacks on Nato and withdrawal from key international agreements. The sentiment was even more audible in the Spanish prime minister's recent statement. At a business forum in Paraguay, he not only decried the US for "unfounded and unfair" measures, but also proposed using retaliatory funds to create an EU solidarity fund for affected industries. Similarly, Denmark reported a record 74% public trust in the EU — up from 63% five years ago — crediting a shared sense of resisting external coercion. Earlier this month, the UK, still navigating post-Brexit independence, joined the WTO's interim appeals mechanism (excluding the US) to safeguard its ability to challenge future trade distortions. Asian allies are likewise on edge: Singapore's defence minister lamented that the US has shifted "from liberator... to a landlord seeking rent". Strategic autonomy A decade ago, the talk of "strategic autonomy" in Brussels elicited polite nods and little action. Today, it has become doctrine. In a recent interview with BBC, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz declared that Europe can no longer be a free rider on US security guarantees, announcing stepped-up defence spending and trilateral security dialogues with France and the UK (the so-called E3). Together, the UK, Germany and France are working on a triangular alliance of major European powers, which Merz says will focus not just on security and foreign policy but on economic growth as well. France and Germany have extended joint procurement plans, while Spain and Italy have explored loosening Nato's centrality in favour of EU-driven defence cooperation. Similarly, Spain and the Netherlands, once sceptical of EU defence, now champion flexibility in EU budget rules to fund military modernisation. Even before taking office, the German chancellor had made waves on the night of his election victory by declaring that the Trump administration was "largely indifferent to the fate of Europe". Asked in the BBC interview whether his view had shifted, he responded that it had not, noting that Trump was "not as clear and as committed as former US presidents were, former US administrations were". Observers point out that European defence budgets, long kept low relative to GDP, are now under political pressure to rise. The EU's joint procurement loan facility — €150 billion in shared borrowing — aims to accelerate drone and artillery acquisitions. An Institute for Global Affairs (Eurasia Group) report finds that Western Europeans are urging their leaders to "stand up to Trump" and even seek partial autonomy from Washington. Even before Trump's return, think tanks were noting how Washington's browbeating of Europe and Latin America was prompting those regions to forge independent arrangements — from a European "army of Europe" to new Asian trade pacts — to hedge against US caprice. One Pew report found that in the past year, only 27% of Europeans have confidence in Trump and fear is growing that a faltering US will neglect Nato and other security guarantees. Remarkably, the 2025 Democracy Perception Index shows China overtaking the US as the world's most positively viewed major power. Beijing is now negotiating a standalone climate pact with the EU. Analysts calculate that Chinese clean tech exports reduced global emissions by roughly 1% in 2024, strengthening Beijing's claim to climate leadership. Latin American nations are doing the same. Brazil, fresh from calling US tariffs "overtly political", established a new Brazilian tax office in Beijing — only the fifth of its kind — signalling where Rio now sees its most dependable partner. The old trust in American stewardship is obsolete, and Europe's halting steps toward strategic autonomy and the assertive postures of others show that a shared resolve to envision a world without Uncle Sam's shield is gaining momentum. The writer is a Lahore-based senior journalist
Business Recorder
2 hours ago
- Business Recorder
US, China to resume tariff talks in effort to extend truce
STOCKHOLM: Senior US and Chinese negotiators meet in Stockholm on Monday to tackle longstanding economic disputes at the centre of the countries' trade war, aiming to extend a truce keeping sharply higher tariffs at bay. China is facing an August 12 deadline to reach a durable tariff agreement with President Donald Trump's administration, after Beijing and Washington reached a preliminary deal in June to end weeks of escalating tit-for-tat tariffs. Without an agreement, global supply chains could face renewed turmoil from duties exceeding 100%. The Stockholm talks, led by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, take place a day after European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen meets Trump at his golf course in Scotland to try to clinch a deal that would likely see a 15% baseline tariff on most EU goods. Trade analysts on both sides of the Pacific say the discussions in the Swedish capital are unlikely to produce any breakthroughs but could prevent further escalation and help create conditions for Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping to meet later this year. Previous US-China trade talks in Geneva and London in May and June focused on bringing US and Chinese retaliatory tariffs down from triple-digit levels and restoring the flow of rare earth minerals halted by China and Nvidia H20 AI chips and other goods halted by the United States. So far, the talks have not delved into broader economic issues. They include US complaints that China's state-led, export-driven model is flooding world markets with cheap goods, and Beijing's complaints that US national security export controls on tech goods seek to stunt Chinese growth. 'Stockholm will be the first meaningful round of US-China trade talks,' said Bo Zhengyuan, Shanghai-based partner at China consultancy firm Plenum. Trump has been successful in pressuring some other trading partners, including Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines, into deals accepting higher US tariffs of 15% to 20%. He said there was a 50-50 chance that the US and the 27-member European Union could also reach a framework trade pact, adding that Brussels wanted to 'make a deal very badly'. Two of Trump's top trade officials, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, will attend the Scotland talks and then travel to Stockholm. Analysts say the US-China negotiations are far more complex and will require more time. China's grip on the global market for rare earth minerals and magnets, used in everything from military hardware to car windshield wiper motors, has proved to be an effective leverage point on US industries. In the background of the talks is speculation about a possible meeting between Trump and Xi in late October. Trump has said he will decide soon whether to visit China in a landmark trip to address trade and security tensions. A new flare-up of tariffs and export controls would likely derail any plans for a meeting with Xi.
Express Tribune
2 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Zuckerberg's Meta to ban political ads in EU
Tech giant said European users would still be able to post about politics. Photo: File Meta on Friday said it will be forced to ban political advertising on its platforms in the European Union from October because of rules the Facebook and Instagram owner called "unworkable". The EU has a bolstered legal armoury to rein in Big Tech, against which Meta has hit out — with the support of US President Donald Trump's administration. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been highly critical of European rules, accusing Brussels in January of "censorship," while this week the US State Department denounced the EU's "Orwellian" regulation of social media. Against this uneasy backdrop, and with EU-US trade tensions sky-high, Meta announced that political, electoral and social issue advertising will no longer be allowed from October in the bloc because of "unworkable requirements" under new rules. "This is a difficult decision — one we've taken in response to the EU's incoming Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising (TTPA) regulation," it said. "Unfortunately, the TTPA introduces significant additional obligations to our processes and systems that create an untenable level of complexity and legal uncertainty for advertisers and platforms operating in the EU," Meta added. The tech giant stressed that its European users would still be able to post and debate about politics. The EU says its political advertising rules seek to increase transparency in online advertising after Facebook's Cambridge Analytica scandal, which came to light in 2018. Cambridge Analytica was a consulting firm that was found to have improperly accessed personal data from millions of Facebook users for targeted political advertising, particularly during the 2016 US election and Brexit referendum. The change is set to impact Meta's flagship platforms Facebook and Instagram, as well as WhatsApp - which is largely ad-free but announced in June that it would be introducing new advertising features in some parts of the app. Meta said it was "not the only company to have been forced into this position". Google last year announced it would also prevent political advertising in the EU from October 2025 because of the "significant new operational challenges and legal uncertainties". Meta and Brussels have locked horns on a series of issues — most recently over the firm's "pay or consent" system regarding user data. The EU slapped a EUR200 million (USD235 million) fine in April after concluding Meta violated rules on the use of personal data on Facebook and Instagram. Zuckerberg has previously equated EU fines against the company to tariffs. Facebook and Instagram also face investigations under the EU's mammoth content moderation law known as the Digital Services Act (DSA).
