From Moratorium to Reform: Aligning Pakistan’s Death Penalty Regime with International Human Rights Standards

Abstract

Pakistan has one of the world’s largest death row populations and retains capital punishment for a broad range of offenses that fall outside the definition of “most serious crimes” under international law. While Pakistan observed a de facto moratorium on executions from 2008 to 2014, this was reversed in response to political and security pressures, terrorist attacks, and retaliatory executions. This paper critically reviews Pakistan’s death penalty regime in relation to its international human rights commitments, particularly under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), and the Convention against Torture (CAT). It investigates systemic issues, including due process shortfalls, mandatory death sentences, coerced confessions, and failure to protect juveniles, women, and persons with mental disabilities. The paper also explores the jurisprudence of Pakistan’s higher judiciary, executive clemency practices, and the interaction between Sharia-based provisions of qisas and diyat and international human rights norms. It contends that a gradual reform trajectory starting with narrowing capital offenses, strengthening procedural safeguards, and reintroducing a moratorium provides a plausible route for Pakistan to align its penal system with international standards while respecting its constitutional and cultural guidelines. Ultimately, the article suggests a rights-based reform agenda that balances domestic legal traditions with the international trend toward restricting and eventually abolishing capital punishment.