Business Recorder
EDITORIAL: The Federal Shariat Court’s decision to restore Section 325 of the Pakistan Penal Code reflects an uncomfortable but necessary recognition that the phenomenon of suicide cannot be reduced to a single explanatory framework. The 2022 decision to completely decriminalise attempted suicide was presented largely through the lens of mental health and compassion. Yet the court was correct in observing that such reasoning, while important, does not account for the full range of circumstances in which suicide attempts may occur. The judgement’s central argument is difficult to dismiss. Depression and mental illness are undeniably major contributors to suicide across the world, including Pakistan. But they are not the sole explanation in every case. The court rightly pointed out that attempts may also arise in contexts involving coercion, extremist influence, political agitation, online manipulation, financial desperation or organised incitement. A blanket legal exemption based on an assumed mental health condition, therefore, creates obvious complications both legally and socially. That concern becomes even more relevant in an age where online platforms and digital influence increasingly shape vulnerable behaviour. The court’s reference to dangerous online challenges and manipulative networks reflects a genuine modern problem. If the underlying act itself carries no legal consequence whatsoever, questions inevitably emerge regarding those who encourage, exploit or orchestrate such behaviour, particularly among children and vulnerable individuals. There is also the constitutional dimension, which cannot simply be brushed aside in Pakistan’s legal framework. The court’s ruling rests not only on criminal law considerations but on the broader Islamic principle that life is sacred and deserving of protection. Since Pakistan’s constitutional order explicitly requires laws to conform to the injunctions of Islam, the court’s reasoning follows a coherent legal path within that structure. At the same time, the ruling should not be interpreted as a dismissal of mental health concerns. That would be both inaccurate and dangerous. Pakistan continues to suffer from severe underinvestment in psychiatric care, weak public awareness regarding mental illness and widespread social stigma surrounding psychological treatment. Many individuals experiencing severe emotional distress still avoid seeking help because mental health struggles are either trivialised or misunderstood. This is where the state’s response must become more sophisticated. Criminal law alone cannot address a deeply complex social and medical issue. The court itself acknowledged that existing legal provisions already allow exemptions for persons of unsound mind. What remains urgently lacking is a stronger system for early detection, intervention and treatment before situations deteriorate into crisis. Pakistan’s healthcare system remains badly underprepared in this area. Mental health services are limited even in major cities and virtually inaccessible in many rural districts. Schools, workplaces and communities often lack even basic mechanisms for identifying severe psychological distress. Families frequently confront such situations without professional guidance or institutional support. That gap matters because prevention is always more effective than punishment after the fact. Greater investment in counselling services, crisis hotlines, psychiatric care and public awareness campaigns would likely do far more to reduce suicide rates than legal deterrence alone. The absence of such support structures leaves many vulnerable individuals isolated until their condition becomes acute. The debate therefore should never have been framed as a simplistic choice between compassion and criminality. A functioning legal system is capable of recognising both the sanctity of life and the reality of mental illness simultaneously. The challenge lies in designing policies that deter abuse of the law while ensuring genuine psychological suffering receives humane treatment rather than neglect. The Federal Shariat Court appears to have recognised that balance more carefully than many critics may admit. Its objection was directed at the blanket nature of decriminalisation rather than the existence of mental health struggles themselves. That distinction is important. Pakistan now needs to move beyond symbolic legal debates and confront the deeper institutional weaknesses surrounding mental healthcare. Restoring legal deterrence without strengthening treatment capacity would leave the underlying problem unresolved. But pretending every suicide attempt emerges from identical circumstances was never a realistic basis for law-making either. The real test will therefore lie in whether policymakers can now combine legal clarity with serious investment in mental health support before more vulnerable lives are lost in silence. Copyright Business Recorder, 2026
Go to News Site