The sanctity of the courthouse has been severely compromised across Pakistan, with shooting, assault and intimidation now reported inside court premises in Lahore, Rawalpindi, Karachi, Peshawar and other cities. Citizens who come to courts seeking protection and fairness increasingly face threats and violence, raising urgent concerns about the effectiveness of current court security arrangements.
Despite formal measures such as visible police presence, metal detectors and CCTV, many incidents continue to unfold as if security were merely symbolic. In several cases armed confrontations and open hooliganism have occurred in full view of police and judicial staff who, critics say, often remain passive. This pattern undermines public confidence and suggests systemic administrative failures and weak coordination between police and court administrations.
The need for a robust Court Security policy is immediate. Courts require specialized, trained teams dedicated to protecting judicial premises and everyone who enters them. Entry controls must be strengthened through reliable biometric verification or authorised identification systems and real-time CCTV monitoring should be linked directly to police control rooms so that threats are detected and acted upon without delay. A strict, enforceable ban on weapons inside court compounds is essential to remove the means of intimidation.
When violence occurs inside courts it must be treated not only as a criminal act but as an assault on the authority of the state. Immediate legal action under anti-terrorism provisions should be considered for those who orchestrate threats, attacks or sustained intimidation on court dates, while police present at scenes must intervene promptly to protect victims and restore order. These measures will signal that court premises are protected spaces where law and dignity prevail.
International practice shows stronger deterrence where courts are treated as highly secure zones. In the United Kingdom, disruption in or near courts can amount to contempt and lead to immediate arrest. In the United States, Court Security Officers under the U.S. Marshals Service play a central role in preventing armed entry. India has also established dedicated court security forces across states. Pakistan should adopt similar, locally tailored safeguards without delay.
Existing Pakistani law already provides tools to address violence in public institutions: Sections 186, 353, 506 and 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code cover obstruction, assault, intimidation and murder, while Article 9 of the Constitution guarantees the right to life and security. The gap lies in enforcement and an institutional will to protect litigants and witnesses inside court precincts.
The superior judiciary and the government must act together. The Chief Justice of Pakistan and the Chief Justices of High Courts should consider taking suo motu notice of recurring violence to compel concrete reforms and accountability. Police leadership must be held to standards that require proactive intervention rather than passive observation when lawlessness erupts inside courts.
Members of the legal profession also bear responsibility. Lawyers can help restore order by refusing to tolerate intimidation, supporting strict enforcement of court rules and working with courts to create a safer environment for litigants. Without decisive action from the judiciary, police and legal community, court premises risk becoming symbols of fear rather than places of justice, and public trust in the justice system will continue to erode.
