In a verdict that has ignited outrage across Pakistan and beyond, the conviction of prominent Baloch rights activist Dr. Mahrang Baloch and fellow leader Sibghatullah Shah highlights deepening tensions over enforced disappearances, fair trials, and political dissent in Balochistan.

On June 22, 2026, an Anti-Terrorism Court in Quetta sentenced Dr. Mahrang Baloch, the chief organiser of the Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC), and fellow leader Sibghatullah Shah to two concurrent life terms. The court convicted them in connection with the 2024 killing of Frontier Corps (FC) soldier Shabbir Ahmed during protests in Gwadar. The ruling has been denounced by rights activists, lawyers, journalists, and international organisations as a “sham trial” and a blow to peaceful advocacy in one of Pakistan’s most restive provinces.

Baloch, a trained doctor born in 1993, rose to prominence as a vocal critic of enforced disappearances and alleged human rights abuses in Balochistan. Her activism stemmed from personal tragedy: as a teenager, she joined searches for her father, who was allegedly abducted by security forces and later killed. Her brother also faced detention. These experiences propelled her into leading the BYC, a movement focused on unity, accountability for missing persons, and greater Baloch control over local resources.

The Gwadar Protest and the Case Against BYC Leaders

The conviction relates to violence during the Baloch Raji Muchi (Baloch National Gathering) organised by the BYC in Gwadar in July 2024. Protesters gathered to demand an end to enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and greater involvement in projects like the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) in the resource-rich but impoverished province. Authorities blocked highways, leading to clashes. Security forces used tear gas, resulting in deaths and injuries among protesters. The prosecution alleged that speeches by Dr. Baloch and others incited a mob that beat the Frontier Corps soldier to death with sticks and stones.

The trial, initially in Gwadar and transferred to Quetta, was conducted inside Hadda jail via video link. Accused leaders reportedly boycotted proceedings, citing inability to engage chosen lawyers. The court appointed state counsel, a move critics slammed as violating constitutional rights to a fair trial under Article 10-A. No independent witnesses were produced, and no transcript or video of the alleged inciting speech was presented, according to legal observers. One accused identified as delivering the fatal blow was acquitted, further undermining the narrative for some.

Balochistan Chief Minister Sarfaraz Bugti welcomed the verdict, stating it vindicated the government’s position against those who “take the law into their own hands under the guise of peaceful protest” and facilitate terrorism.

Outcry from Legal Fraternity and Rights Groups

Senior lawyers have been scathing. Senator Kamran Murtaza, former Supreme Court Bar Association president, highlighted violations including lack of accused presence with chosen counsel and failure to record statements under CrPC Section 342. Abid Saqi, former Pakistan Bar Council vice chairman, called it a “political verdict” handed down by the executive rather than the judiciary. Jibran Nasir noted the absence of independent evidence.

The Balochistan Bar Council expressed concern over the jail trial format. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) deplored the state’s equating of rights advocacy with militancy and called for a review and political dialogue.

International voices joined the chorus. Front Line Defenders condemned the sentences, citing concerns over transparency and fair trial standards raised by Dr. Baloch’s sister Nadia and legal team. PEN Norway and the Narges Foundation demanded immediate release and quashing of convictions. UN experts have repeatedly called for her release, noting the use of counter-terrorism laws against defenders.

Broader Context of Enforced Disappearances and Baloch Grievances

Dr. Baloch’s case is emblematic of longstanding issues in Balochistan. Human rights groups document enforced disappearances, with families often receiving mutilated bodies or no information. Estimates vary widely; official inquiries acknowledge hundreds to thousands of cases, while activists claim far higher figures, including in recent years. The BYC has organised major protests, including long marches to Islamabad, amplifying demands for justice, resource rights, and an end to military operations.

Critics argue that labelling peaceful protesters as terrorists closes doors to dialogue. Former senator Farhatullah Babar linked it to other convictions of activists like Imaan Mazari. Senior journalist Mariana Baabar warned it undermines peaceful solutions, potentially pushing desperate actors toward violence. Afrasiab Khattak, socialist politician, political analyst and senior leader of the National Democratic Movement described it as a “colonial and myopic” policy.

Baloch political leaders echoed this. Sardar Akhtar Mengal of BNP-M called decisions “handed down” from elsewhere, questioning accountability for killings and disappearances. Mahmood Khan Achakzai termed Pakistan a “prison for oppressed nationalities.” The National Party stressed the need for constitutional adherence and dialogue.

Implications for Peace and Stability in Balochistan

The conviction comes amid ongoing security challenges, with the state viewing BYC activities as linked to insurgent groups – a charge the movement denies, insisting on peaceful, constitutional methods. Dr. Baloch has been recognised internationally, appearing in BBC’s 100 Women, TIME’s 100 Next, and receiving a Nobel Peace Prize nomination.

Supporters fear the ruling will exacerbate alienation, fuel unrest, and weaken democratic processes. Journalists like Munizae Jahangir and Mubashir Zaidi emphasised the danger of punishing peaceful voices, arguing it strengthens narratives of injustice.

As appeals loom, the case tests Pakistan’s judicial independence and commitment to human rights. With Balochistan’s complex mix of resource wealth, strategic importance (including Gwadar port), and historical marginalisation, sustainable peace likely requires addressing root grievances through inclusive dialogue rather than solely security measures.