The Government of Punjab in Pakistan recently introduced the Punjab Control of Habitual Offenders and Anti-Social Behaviour Bill 2026 (‘Bill’) in the Assembly of Punjab. The Bill aims to control and curb a category of ‘anti-social’ activities through punishments such as impounding of passport, blocking of National ID card, removal of online accounts, freezing of bank accounts, attachment of property etc. It also allows surveillance and monitoring of individuals involved in ‘anti-social’ activities through electronic monitoring mechanisms and collection of their biometric data.

The Bill was criticised by opposition parties in Pakistan and human rights organisations including the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, seeking immediate and permanent withdrawal of the Bill. As of now, the Bill has been sent back to the Law Department for reconsideration and review. From electronic monitoring devices to executive controlled intelligence committees, the provisions of the Bill prima facie undermine basic and inalienable human rights such as right to speech and expression, right to peaceful assembly, and right to a fair trial. In this piece, I argue that provisions of the Bill, particularly Section 9 and Section 10, violate the Right to Privacy guaranteed under Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). As a signatory to the ICCPR with no reservations expressed against Article 17, the local government in Pakistan is bound by the provision.

Article 17 of the ICCPR, amongst other things, protects individuals against arbitrary or unlawful interference with their privacy. It states that ‘everyone has the right to protection of the law against such interference or attacks.’ General Comment No. 16 (‘GC’) on Article 17 further provides that States have an obligation to give effect to this right. As per the GC, ‘arbitrary interference’ includes interference provided for by law. The law itself has to meet standards and thresholds set by the ICCPR, such as the proportionality test or standard of reasonableness. Article 17 considers the right to privacy as a fundamental aspect of protecting human integrity and dignity and therefore prohibits surveillance such in the form of interception, recording, wiretapping, etc.

The Bill does not merely infringe on the right to privacy, but rather creates a surveillance regime which aims to produce and uphold arbitrary standards of ‘good’ behaviour in society. Particularly, Section 9 of the Bill allows the State to surveil and monitor individuals who have been declared habitual offenders under the Bill. Such surveillance is to be done by attaching an electronic monitoring device to the individual for a minimum of three months. It is also pertinent to note that habitual offenders as defined under Section 9 read with Section 2 of the Bill can be individuals against whom cases have merely been registered or a police report submitted under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Pakistan. Further, Section 10 of the Bill allows the State to take and store biometric information of a habitual offender. This includes photographs, fingerprints, and DNA of the accused. There are no clear guidelines as to the duration of retention, the storage of such sensitive personal data, or why it is necessary and the least restrictive measure to control ‘anti-social’ behaviour. In Maharajah Madhewoh v Mauritius, the Human Rights Committee (HRC) while interpreting the nature and scope of Article 17 of the ICCPR, observed that collection of biometric data (in this case for national personal identity cards) must be accompanied by sufficient legal safeguards and ‘guarantees against the risk of abuse and arbitrariness of the interference’. Given the absence of such safeguards in the case, the HRC concluded that the law requiring biometric data for national ID constitutes an ‘arbitrary interference’ with the scope of right to privacy under Article 17 of the ICCPR.

The Bill therefore does not meet the legal standards and thresholds under Article 17 of the ICCPR. It lacks clear legal safeguards and gives effect to a surveillance regime which will significantly impact rights other than privacy as well, such as freedom of speech and expression. The Government of Punjab must withdraw the Bill unconditionally and permanently to uphold Pakistan’s international legal obligations under the ICCPR.