The approval of the Balochistan Prevention, Detention and Deradicalisation Rules 2025 by Pakistan’s Balochistan provincial government has triggered sharp criticism from human rights groups and independent observers, who warn that the move effectively seeks to legalise enforced disappearances in the conflict-hit region.

According to an editorial published by The Balochistan Post, the rules—approved during a provincial cabinet meeting chaired by Chief Minister Sarfraz Bugti—provide formal legal cover for detaining forcibly disappeared individuals in custody centres, where they may be interrogated under the supervision of police officers from the Counter-Terrorism Department instead of being produced before courts.

The editorial argued that the legislation contradicts fundamental rights guaranteed under Pakistan’s Constitution and appears aimed at suppressing growing public protests against enforced disappearances, particularly those led by families of missing persons. Declaring forcibly disappeared individuals as “suspects” and holding them in detention centres without judicial oversight, it said, undermines due process and normalises illegal state practices.

Human rights organisations have long documented enforced disappearances in Balochistan. The United Nations, Amnesty International, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, and other global watchdogs have repeatedly raised concerns over the issue and urged Pakistani authorities to ensure accountability. Despite this, the provincial government has consistently denied the existence of enforced disappearances while simultaneously approving legal frameworks that critics say amount to tacit admission of state involvement.

On January 21, the Human Rights Council of Balochistan (HRCB) rejected the provincial government’s claim that the issue of missing persons had been “resolved permanently,” calling it a “grave misrepresentation of facts.” According to HRCB’s findings for 2025, there were 1,455 documented cases of enforced disappearance, including 12 women. Of these, 1,052 individuals remain missing, 317 were released, 83 were killed in custody, and three were transferred to jail.

“These figures clearly demonstrate that enforced disappearances continue at scale,” the rights body said, adding that hundreds of families remain unaware of the fate or whereabouts of their loved ones despite approaching courts and human rights institutions.

Paank, the Human Rights Department of the Baloch National Movement, also condemned the legislation, warning that the establishment of detention centres outside transparent judicial oversight risks institutionalising arbitrary arrests and secret detentions. The group said limited family access cannot replace lawful arrests, court proceedings, or accountability.

Rights groups have stressed that enforced disappearance is a serious crime under international law and cannot be legitimised through administrative or legal rebranding. Critics warn that rather than silencing dissent, such measures may further deepen mistrust and fuel unrest in Balochistan.