Quetta: The Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC) has strongly rejected the life imprisonment sentences handed down to its leaders by a Balochistan Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC), calling the verdict “judicial tyranny” and alleging that the case lacks credible evidence and legal foundation.
The reaction came after an ATC in Quetta sentenced prominent Baloch rights activist Dr. Mahrang Baloch, along with three other activists, to life imprisonment in connection with the death of Frontier Corps (FC) personnel Shabbir Baloch during the controversial Raji Muchi gathering in Gwadar.
In its statement, the BYC said the verdict would be remembered alongside what it described as historical miscarriages of justice, explicitly referencing the execution of Hamid Baloch 45 years ago, which the group called a “black stain” on the state of Pakistan. It is alleged that, like past cases, the current verdict would also be remembered as an example of judicial injustice.
The committee further questioned the legal basis of the conviction, pointing to what it described as contradictory First Information Reports (FIRs). According to the BYC, the case contains inconsistencies regarding the date of death of the FC personnel, claiming that different FIRs mention different dates, 27 July in one and 29 July in another, which it argues undermines the credibility of the prosecution’s case.
“How is it possible that the same FC personnel dies on 27 July according to one FIR and on 29 July according to another?” the statement said, arguing that such contradictions render the trial “legally unreliable” and the verdict unjust.
The BYC also alleged that during the Raji Muchi gathering, security forces used excessive force, resulting in deaths, injuries, and permanent disabilities among protesters. It claimed that no accountability has been established for those incidents, while its own leadership has been convicted in connection with the killing of a security official. These allegations could not be independently verified.
Reiterating its position, the organization said the verdict represents a broader pattern of repression in Balochistan and accused the state of using legal mechanisms to suppress political dissent. It maintained that its struggle remains “democratic, political, and peaceful” and vowed to continue its campaign despite the convictions.
The group also announced that it would challenge the verdict through what it described as “the court of the people,” rejecting the legitimacy of the judicial process and pledging continued political resistance.
The sentencing has triggered concern among rights advocates and political observers, with expectations of reactions from civil society groups and potential international human rights organizations.
Legal experts note that appeals against Anti-Terrorism Court decisions can be filed in higher courts; however, no formal appeal has yet been announced by the defense team at the time of reporting.
The situation remains tense, with further developments expected as both legal and political responses unfold.
