Legal traps, jail terms & seclusion: How Pakistan has perfected the art of silencing dissent

The Pakistani government is doubling down on its legal offensive against jailed former prime minister Imran Khan and prominent activists, framing the measures as essential for “national security.” However, as prison doors remain barred to visitors and human rights lawyers face decade-long sentences, critics warn that the country’s democratic space is vanishing under the shadow of military influence.

Officials say restrictions placed on Khan, including the suspension of prison visits, were imposed after he violated jail rules that prohibit political activity and the dissemination of what authorities describe as anti-state narratives. The government and military deny claims that the measures amount to illegal isolation or an attempt to silence him.




Interior minister Talal Chaudhry has rejected allegations of mistreatment, calling Khan “the most privileged prisoner in Pakistan” and citing access to facilities such as gym equipment and a personal cook. He said the restrictions were lawful and in line with prison regulations.

The government also dismisses accusations that the military is driving political decisions. “The civilian government is [taking] decisions. We are all working hand in glove,” Chaudhry said, praising the chief of defence forces as “doing a marvellous job," as quoted by BBC. Security sources insist the military operates strictly within constitutional and legal limits.

Military spokespersons have argued that certain political narratives pose a growing threat to national security, particularly when a convicted politician is accused of using prison meetings to mobilise public opinion against state institutions. Officials say such actions cross the boundary from political expression into matters of national defence.

Authorities stress that legal action against politicians, activists and lawyers is based on violations of existing laws, including the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), rather than an effort to suppress dissent. “Attempts to frame law-breaking as democracy or human rights are entirely misplaced,” Chaudhry said.

The same legal rationale underpinned the recent conviction of human rights lawyer Imaan Mazari and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha. The couple were sentenced to 10 years in prison after being found guilty of sharing what the state described as anti-state content on social media.

According to prosecutors and the court ruling, their online activity involved “disseminating and propagating narratives that align with hostile terrorist groups” and undermined state institutions. Defending the verdict, information minister Attaullah Tarar said it reflected the proper application of the law, posting on X: “As you sow, so you shall reap!”

The government maintains that these measures are necessary to prevent destabilisation and ensure accountability, regardless of an individual’s political profile or public standing.

Critics, however, argue that the cases of Khan and Mazari show that he is not the only one being silenced, and warn that the space for dissent in Pakistan is narrowing as the military’s influence continues to loom large over civilian life.