THE Torture and Custodial Death (Prevention & Punishment) Act, 2022, signified a paradigm shift in a centuries-old relationship between law enforcement and torture. Colonial-style, force-based policing had remained an unfortunate, implicitly accepted element of our justice system. As such, the consensus of hundreds of lawmakers in criminalising torture was an unprecedented display of political and institutional resolve. It was evident, however, that the new law was only the beginning of a long journey.

Before us stood a system long reliant on inherited methods of policing, seldom given the opportunity or support to transition towards rights-based policing.

Too often, we expect our public officials to abandon old habits without being taught new, more effective ones. Without our law enforcement being equipped with the tools to carry out their duties without relying on coercive interrogation; without the FIA and the National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR) being given a clear framework to conduct independent and impartial investigations into torture and custodial deaths; without our judiciary being deeply acquainted with the sensitivities that accompany this grave offence, we risk allowing harmful practices to persist under the guise of routine procedure eroding public trust and undermining the very purpose of justice.

The number of complaints being lodged under the Act is thankfully increasing, after nearly three years in which many justice system actors remained unaware of its existence. But the way these complaints are being handled, both by investigating authorities and the courts, has revealed an uneasy truth there is a profound gap in awareness, training, and readiness to enforce the Act as intended.

Section 18 of the Act mandates state-led trainings and sensitisation for all relevant stakeholders, and current capacity building efforts must be scaled up.

The UN Committee Against Torture, the principal watchdog over compliance with the Convention Against Torture (CAT), has acknowledged this capacity vacuum. In May this year, it released its List of Issues ahead of Pakistan`s second periodic review under CAT, scheduled for 2026. The list invites Pakistan to clarify implementation of the Act, raising concerns about the absence of implementing rules to operationaliseit.Itreguestsinformation on procedural safeguards such as access to legal and medical assistance, detention monitoring, and complaint mechanisms and how these are ensured in practice. The committee also seeks updates on training initiatives for publicofficials, particularly whether these are systematic, measurable and based on international frameworks such as the Istanbul Protocol and Méndez Principles.

These are tough questions, because many of them cannot yet be answered to the committee`s satisfaction. And that is, perhaps, a good thing. It cannot be denied that, on the back of years of sustained civil society engagement and scrutiny by the EU under the GSP-Plus arrangement, Pakistan has gradually begun to treat its international commitments with the respect and gravity they are due. It no longer shies away from engagement with UN mechanisms, and displays unexpected maturity in its conduct at these fora. As such, it is hoped that the CAT List of Issues will serve as a guiding document for strengthening Pakistan`s compliance with international human rights law.

Responding to gaps in capacity building, the NCHR, in collaboration with Justice Project Pakistan and with invaluable input from the Punjab Criminal Prosecution Service, has launched a com-prehensive training manual and e-course for public officials on preventing torture.

Thispracticalresource, intended for use across justice system departments and institutions, guides rele-vant actors in understanding their duties under domestic and international law on torture, delivering practical advice on lawful interrogation, complaint handling, accountability mechanisms and victim redress.

Capacity-building efforts must recognise that the realchallenge liesin changing perceptions of torture as an inevitability of justice, through a collective reimagining of how we police, prosecute and punish. This reimagining cannot be achieved by the state alone, nor by civil society working in isolation. It will take a shared commitment from those who make the laws, those who enforce them, and those who hold them to account. The criminal justice system must be capacitated not just in the letter of the law, but in the values that underpin it. And civil society must continue to do what it has done for decades: document human rights violations, and guide and support efforts to rebuild a justice system that serves every Pakistani. • The wnter is an advocacy specialist at Justice Project Pakistan.