ISLAMABAD: The Punjab prosecution department has urged consecutive prison sentences for brutal and heinous crimes. Specifically, it told the Supreme Court that concurrent terms should not be the routine outcome. The written submission argues a clear point. Indeed, each grave offence should carry its own distinct punishment.
The response was filed through Punjab Additional Prosecutor General Tariq Siddique. It urges the court to discourage a routine practice. Specifically, this is the practice of ordering sentences to run concurrently in every criminal case. It includes cases involving multiple murders.
A seven-member larger bench is examining the question. It is headed by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail. The bench will decide a key issue. Should a person convicted of multiple murders serve life sentences concurrently or consecutively? In addition, it will determine how the term of life imprisonment should be calculated under Pakistani law. The next hearing is fixed for November 10.
What concurrent and consecutive sentences mean
The distinction is simple but carries heavy consequences. When sentences run concurrently, a convict serves all of them at the same time. As a result, two life terms effectively become one. When sentences run consecutively, the convict serves them one after the other. Consequently, each conviction adds real time behind bars.
Punjab’s submission makes a strong claim. For example, it says the casual use of concurrent sentences creates an artificial equivalence. Killing one person is treated the same as killing several. Moreover, the government argues that automatically merging multiple sentences into a single term is wrong. As a result, it diminishes the seriousness of each additional offence.
Punjab’s case for consecutive prison sentences at the Supreme Court
The written response states a clear rule. Consecutive sentences should apply in exceptional cases. These involve extremely brutal, inhuman and heinous crimes that shock the public conscience. Specifically, it names four categories. These are murder, kidnapping, sexual assault and terrorism.
The government argues that consecutive sentences for multiple murders would reflect the gravity of each offence. Moreover, they would reinforce public confidence in the criminal justice system. In addition, they would serve the deterrent and retributive purposes of punishment. The submission asks courts to issue reasoned and explicit orders. These are needed whenever courts direct sentences to run consecutively. This applies especially in cases marked by exceptional cruelty.
“If courts continue to order different sentences to run concurrently in an unguarded and casual manner, a message will be conveyed to society that our criminal justice system makes no distinction between the murder of one person and the murder of several persons,” the response stated. It added that every unlawful taking of a human life should attract a distinct and meaningful legal consequence.
The submission draws on Section 4 of the Punjab Sentencing Act, 2019. That provision lists the objectives of sentencing. Specifically, these are punishing offenders and preventing and reducing crime. They also include deterring criminal conduct and rehabilitating offenders. Finally, they include protecting the public.
Life terms shrink to 15 years, Punjab warns
The response also raises a practical concern. How long does life imprisonment actually last in Pakistan? According to the government, remissions and sentence reductions cut it short. As a result, a life sentence can effectively shrink to around 15 years. The argument is that this dilution weakens the punishment for the gravest crimes. Consequently, it makes the concurrent-consecutive question even more important.
The concern lands in a system already under strain. For example, Pakistan’s prisons hold more than 110,000 inmates. In fact, three in four are still awaiting trial. The bench’s ruling could therefore affect two things. It could change how sentences are structured. It could also change how long the most serious offenders actually remain behind bars.
Courts and sentencing in the spotlight
The case adds to a series of recent court actions drawing national attention. For example, the Supreme Court recently barred the transfer of absorbed traffic wardens back to district police. Meanwhile, the Lahore High Court banned filming across court premises. The Peshawar High Court set aside a 10-year sentence in a fabricated evidence case. The sentencing question before Justice Mandokhail’s bench may prove the most consequential of them all. In fact, it touches the core of how Pakistan punishes its worst crimes.
Finally, the story was first reported by The Express Tribune.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between concurrent and consecutive prison sentences?
Under concurrent sentences, a convict serves multiple sentences at the same time. As a result, they overlap into a single term. Under consecutive sentences, the convict serves each sentence one after another. Consequently, this adds real additional time for each conviction.
What is the Supreme Court deciding in this case?
A seven-member larger bench is deciding the case. Specifically, it is led by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail. The question is whether a person convicted of multiple murders should serve life sentences concurrently or consecutively. The bench will also decide how the term of life imprisonment should be determined under Pakistani law.
What is Punjab asking for?
The Punjab prosecution department wants consecutive sentences in exceptional cases. These are extremely brutal, inhuman and heinous crimes. They include murder, kidnapping, sexual assault and terrorism. In addition, it says courts should give reasoned orders when imposing them.
When is the next hearing?
The next hearing is scheduled for November 10.
