January 30, 2026
By Bilal Baseer
ISLAMABAD
The alleged concealment of a First Information Report (FIR) linked to a Baloch Yekjehti Committee (BYC) protest on July 26 last year, has triggered renewed concerns over transparency and accountability within Pakistan’s law enforcement system, following the surfacing of the case months later during legal proceedings.
The FIR, registered under provisions of the Anti Terrorism Act, the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) and the Peaceful Assembly and Public Order Act 2024, named three women, lawyer Imaan Mazari, activist Nadia Baloch and Amna Badar, and one man, Hadi Ali Chattha. It also listed 15 to 20 unidentified women and 60 to 70 unidentified men. According to legal filings, the FIR remained inaccessible to the accused for an extended period and surfaced only after related legal action was initiated.
Members of the BYC have questioned the legality and propriety of withholding FIRs and producing them at the discretion of law enforcement agencies.
Sammi Deen Baloch, spokesperson for the committee, said that multiple FIRs registered against her and other activists were never disclosed despite repeated applications and requests through legal channels.
She said applications were filed in courts seeking details of all FIRs against BYC members to allow them to apply for bail where required, but authorities failed to provide the information. According to her, FIRs are often revealed only at the time of arrest or detention, enabling law enforcement agencies to extend custody.
“This practice allows the authorities to use old or undisclosed FIRs whenever they want to arrest or detain activists. We have repeatedly approached courts to challenge this practice, but the authorities continue to withhold information, creating legal uncertainty for citizens who are targeted for their activism,” she claimed.
Nadia Baloch, sister of activist Dr Mahrang Baloch, who is also named in the FIR, said that such conduct by police authorities was not surprising. She explained that many FIRs against activists, including members of the BYC remain undisclosed until arrests are made, leaving persons and their families unaware of the charges they face.
She cited her sister’s case, saying Dr Mahrang was initially arrested under the Maintenance of Public Order (MPO).
“After three and a half months, a large number of FIRs were filed against her. We now know of around 40 cases, but we only learned about them once she was already in jail,” said Nadia. “Each time she secured bail in one case, another would surface. The state has turned this into a tactic to exhaust and suppress people, and it creates prolonged uncertainty for citizens who are exercising their rights,” she said.
‘Cannot conceal FIRs’
Legal experts, however, have stressed that FIRs cannot lawfully be concealed. Senior advocate Munir A. Malik said that an FIR must be placed before a court and is therefore classified as a public document, accessible to any citizen through a proper legal application.
Syed Amjad Shah, a member of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC), said that once an FIR is registered, it is transmitted to the relevant court and police record branches, making it part of the official public record. He emphasised that FIRs cannot be sealed in the ordinary course of law.
Shah further explained that under the Right of Access to Information Act 2017, an FIR qualifies as a public record that any citizen may request. However, he said that access is not absolute and may be limited in certain circumstances, including cases involving national security, public order or ongoing investigations in which disclosure could prejudice the proceedings. He also noted that privacy concerns, witness protection and court imposed restrictions may justify limited non disclosure in specific instances.
He cited the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984, under which FIRs fall within the definition of public documents. Article 87 obligates the lawful custodian of a public document to provide a certified copy upon request, making it a statutory duty to ensure transparency and accessibility.
Advocate Umar Gilani of the Supreme Court of Pakistan said that the practice of keeping FIRs dormant for extended periods reflected deeper structural issues within the criminal justice system. He said that, unlike civil law, criminal law does not prescribe clear limitation periods, giving investigating officers wide discretion over the timing and conduct of investigations.
He added that this discretion allows FIRs to remain inactive for months or even years before being revived, exposing citizens to delayed arrests, prolonged detention and uncertainty regarding their legal status. He emphasised that statutory time limits for investigation and prosecution are essential to prevent arbitrary enforcement and to uphold principles of due process and justice.
When contacted to seek clarification, police officials did not respond, as repeated phone calls and text messages requesting comment were not returned.
Observers said the delayed disclosure of FIRs raises serious concerns about the potential misuse of the criminal justice system against activists and ordinary citizens alike, and highlights the need for reforms to ensure accountability and timely access to information.