Faceless courts threaten open justice

November 9, 2026

The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government’s plan to establish faceless anti-terrorism courts raises serious questions about the future of justice in a province already struggling with a growing security crisis. Protecting judges, prosecutors and witnesses from terrorist threats is a legitimate concern. However, turning the judicial process into a system where the identities of those administering justice are concealed risks undermining the principles of transparency and accountability.

The proposed arrangement, shared during an official briefing on Sunday attended by KP Governor Faisal Karim Kundi, is intended to encourage witnesses to participate in terrorism cases without fearing retaliation. An official said many witnesses were reluctant to appear in court because of security threats. The provincial administration has reportedly forwarded proposed amendments to establish these courts.

The problem is real. Terrorist groups have targeted law enforcement personnel, prosecutors and individuals cooperating with investigations. Witnesses may fear for their lives, while judges and lawyers can also face threats for handling sensitive cases. The state has a responsibility to protect them. But security concerns cannot become a justification for weakening the safeguards that make a trial fair.

The anonymity of judicial officials and other participants raises questions about how defendants will challenge evidence, establish possible conflicts of interest and ensure that proceedings remain impartial. Justice must not only be delivered; it must also be seen to be delivered. A system that reduces public scrutiny risks damaging confidence in the courts and creating opportunities for abuse.

The government must explain precisely what it means by faceless courts, whose identities will be concealed, how defence lawyers will exercise their legal rights and what independent oversight will prevent misuse. Protecting witnesses through secure testimony, relocation and identity protection is different from concealing the identity of judges and prosecutors.

The briefing also outlined plans to allocate Rs70 billion annually to the Counter-Terrorism Department and provincial police to strengthen their operational capacity. Better resources, intelligence gathering, investigation and witness protection are essential to defeating terrorism.

KP needs stronger counterterrorism institutions, but it also needs stronger justice. The fight against terrorism must not come at the expense of the very legal principles the state is supposed to defend. Security and justice must reinforce each other, not compete with each other.