17 ZAFAR IQBAL THE ‘TERRORIST’: A SON WHO SHOT HIS FATHER DURING A HEATED ARGUMENT SENTENCED TO DEATH: MAY 2003 (11 YEARS SERVED ON DEATH ROW) HELD IN: CENTRAL JAIL MIANWALI, PUNJAB Zafar allegedly shot his father in a fit of rage during a long-running dispute about Zafar’s inheritance. Such a case is clearly a world away from the ‘terrorism’ envisaged by the ATA. Yet Zafar was tried as a terrorist on the basis that “the cold blooded murder of father by his son is itself sufficient to create the sense of insecurity and terror in the people of the locality”. All of the evidence presented at trial against Zafar was, on the trial judge’s own assessment, deeply flawed in some way. The judge acknowledged that the prosecution had not convincingly proved motive; he excluded the ballistics evidence as the police had failed to have it forensically examined; and he deemed large swathes of the eyewitness testimony “not confidence inspiring”. Despite these myriad weaknesses in the prosecution’s case, Zafar was found guilty and received two death sentences. All of this happened in less than three weeks; it is little wonder that Zafar’s defence lawyer gave no sign of having prepared his client’s case properly. “THE COLD BLOODED MURDER OF FATHER BY HIS SON IS ITSELF SUFFICIENT TO CREATE THE SENSE OF INSECURITY AND TERROR IN THE PEOPLE OF THE LOCALITY.” The Anti-Terrorism Court judge at Zafar’s trial In 2008, shortly before Zafar was due to be executed, he was granted a pardon by his brother and other family members. Yet he remains under threat of execution on the basis of his – entirely unjustified – sentence under the Anti-Terrorism Act. TERROR ON DEATH ROW THE ABUSE AND OVERUSE OF PAKISTAN’S ANTI-TERRORISM LEGISLATION