Abstract:
This study examines the legal frameworks governing pre-charge detention and the
prohibition of torture in Pakistan and the United Kingdom (UK) concerning
international human rights standards. It identifies key legal and enforcement gaps that
expose detainees to arbitrary detention and torture. The UK, despite a strong legal
system, faces challenges in balancing national security with individual rights,
particularly in terrorism cases. Pakistan struggles with weak enforcement of anti-torture
laws, political influence, and poor detention conditions, despite ratifying the UN
Convention Against Torture (UNCAT).
A comparative Socio-Legal approach is adopted, using international human rights law
as a benchmark to assess domestic legal frameworks. The study analyzes arrest
procedures, detention duration, detainee treatment, interrogation practices, and
detention conditions. Findings reveal widespread arbitrary arrests and custodial torture
in Pakistan, fueled by impunity and weak judicial oversight. In the UK, concerns
include prolonged Pre-charge detention in terrorism cases and coercive interrogation
tactics.
The research recommends stronger legal enforcement, independent oversight, reduced
pre-charge detention periods, and guaranteed access to legal counsel. Implementing
these reforms will help align both countries’ practices with international human rights
obligations. This study contributes to torture prevention, detention reform, and human
rights law, offering insights for policymakers, legal professionals, and human rights
advocate
