Missing Persons: Demystifying Facts from Fiction

The issue of missing persons has been used against the Pakistani state by both internal and foreign actors. Through narrative warfare, certain domestic and foreign inimical forces seek to undermine Pakistan’s credibility and international standing by amplifying unverified allegations of missing persons and enforced disappearances and insinuating state complicity. Whereas, Pakistan has consistently engaged government stakeholders, international human rights organisations and civil society to address the plight of missing persons and their families through legislative and administrative reforms.

Missing Persons is a Global Phenomenon

Missing persons and enforced disappearances are global problems that affect people of different ethnicities, religions and political backgrounds. UN has recorded numerous missing person and enforced disappearance cases across 115 countries, including Iraq, Iran, Sri Lanka, Chile, Ethiopia, Syria, African countries, Bangladesh, India, China, Russia, the US and Pakistan.

Multiple other countries, till date, report significant cases which pertain to missing persons and therefore continue to be challenged and riddled by the same. For instance, in the United States, approximately over 500,000 cases pertaining to missing persons, out of which about 100,000 are still active cases.

Similarly, in the United Kingdom, after every 90 seconds, a new case of a missing person is registered. Approximately 300,000 individuals are reported missing within the territorial jurisdiction of the UK every year, out of which around 4,500 cases pertain to the long-term disappearance of individuals.

A report by World Population Review unveiled that in India, over 350,000 cases of missing persons are reported and registered annually. The report further revealed that approximately 2,130 persons go missing every day in India.

Over 40,000 individuals went missing in Yugoslavia during 1990. Similarly, during Mexico’s ‘War on Drugs’, 86,451 individuals went missing. In Sri Lankan conflict, approximately 21,374 individuals went missing. International Commission for Missing Persons estimates that over 10,000 people went missing in Syria since 2019. In Iraq, estimates of missing persons range from 0.25 million to 1 million.

Why Missing Persons Issue is Overblown against Pakistan?

On the contrary, a total of 11,035 cases have been registered in Pakistan’s Missing Persons Commission, out of which 9,596 (86.95%) have been resolved. Province-wide data further repudiates missing persons and enforced disappearances propaganda against Pakistan, particularly by Baloch activists and their aligned INGOs.

From the above figures, it is obvious how the issue has been framed through disinformation, as Balochistan has recorded the highest provincial case resolution rate, with 2,797 out of 2,970 registered cases resolved, accounting for 94.17% of total cases registered in the province.

In Pakistan, only 1,439 cases are under investigation. Interestingly, the quantum of reported number of missing-person cases in India is substantially higher than in Pakistan, despite India’s absence of comparable internal unrest and civil turmoil, military engagement outside its territory or direct involvement in a War on Terror within its own territorial jurisdiction.

Pakistan’s law enforcement agencies have made sustained efforts to trace and recover missing persons, with Pakistan maintaining a high recovery rate. Pakistan’s counter-terrorism operations were also driven by obligations under international law, particularly UN Security Council Resolutions 1373 and 1267, requiring states to take measures against designated terrorist groups, individuals and entities operating domestically and transnationally.

Every Missing Person is Framed as Enforced Disappearance by a Specific Lobby

Data clearly reflects concrete and expeditious measures being adopted by Pakistan to trace and resolve missing person or enforced disappearance cases. Despite such untiring efforts and tremendous sacrifices, law enforcement agencies of Pakistan continue to get blamed without proof for each missing person. In this regard, through a mala fide campaign across electronic, print, social and digital media outlets, misconceptions have been created about the role of Pakistani law enforcement agencies in missing persons allegations.

The most common fallacy created through international pressure and influence is that all persons on the list of missing persons have been picked up by law enforcement agencies and intelligence agencies.

Baloch activists, PTM and certain anti-state elements based abroad have helped coin and popularise missing persons terminology as a means of framing the issue against Pakistan. Those residing in Europe, including individuals who have obtained asylum, exploit host countries’ freedoms of expression and asylum protections to promote these narratives through digital and other platforms, seeking to discredit state institutions and undermine Pakistan’s diplomatic and economic interests.

Portrayal of Pakistan’s missing persons issue as a state policy is driven by a nexus between anti-state elements within Pakistan, Western lobbyists and political fronts for terrorist organisations operating in Europe. Through coordinated advocacy, lobbying and media engagement, these networks project unverified allegations as established facts, manufacturing a narrative of enforced disappearances to malign state institutions and advance vested anti-Pakistan agendas.

How Vested Interests Inflate Missing Persons Figures?

There is no denying the fact that there are missing persons cases, but it is also true that not all missing persons are enforced disappearance cases. It is unfortunate that individuals belonging to the following categories are being projected as missing person or enforced disappearance by various segments of society, including affected families:

• Terrorists involved in terrorism related activities and who joined proscribed organisations.
• Illegal immigrants to Europe via Afghanistan, Iran, etc.
• Individuals killed abroad (Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Zanobia Brigade, etc).
• Absconders involved in criminal activities or facing trial in court.
• Proclaimed Offenders also reported as missing persons by families to avoid apprehensions.
• Individuals killed in police or Counter Terrorism Department (CTD) encounters and law enforcement agency operations.
• Individuals left their homes on their own but are reported as missing.
• Deaf and dumb or mentally retarded individuals who left their homes without any information.
• Individuals abducted due to personal enmities.
• Even custody of minor child cases have also been reported in the Missing Persons Commission.
• 70% to 80% of cases can be termed as personal or vested interest type.

Over a period of time, different studies have also been carried out by various stakeholders on the issue.

Some additional factors identified for surge in such cases are:

• Dead bodies of terrorist buried at unmarked places by their accomplices. Families, in a few cases, are also not informed about their deaths for obvious ramifications.
• Brainwashed individuals leaving homes without informing families to join terrorists or ferrari camps or terrorist hideouts in tribal districts, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa or Balochistan, etc.
• Individuals from various parts of the country went voluntarily to tribal districts, Afghanistan and Syria to participate, eventually died in the process and were buried locally in the area.
• Burial of 34000 un-identify dead bodies by Cheepa or Edhi.
• A trend has emerged of reporting cases to the Missing Persons Commission instead of the police station.
• Individuals undergoing trial or punishment in jail are reported as missing person or enforced disappearance.

From Complaints to Closure: State Efforts to Resolve Cases

Pakistan’s federal and all provincial governments have made serious efforts to settle the issue.
1^st Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances (COIED) was established in May 2010, resolving 256 of 392 registered cases, with 136 transferred to the 2^nd Commission in March 2011. Following successive changes in composition and leadership, the Federal Government reconstituted the Commission on 25 June 2025. After a leadership transition, Justice (R) Manzoor Hussain Malik was appointed Chairman on 6 April 2026. The Commission continues to provide an institutional mechanism for examining complaints, tracing missing persons and pursuing case resolution.

Out of 11035 cases registered with COIED, 9596 have been resolved, while the remaining 1439 active registered cases (13.05%) are under investigation. Out of 1439 active registered cases, more than 80% of the cases belong to far-flung areas, where complainants do not appear before the Commission on a regular basis for certain reasons, which causes delays in the finalisation of the inquiry and investigation process.

The COIED follows a four-stage working methodology. Initially, cases are referred to the Home Department and Police, where Joint Investigation Teams (JITs) meet fortnightly and are required to conclude investigations within 45 days before submitting their reports to the Commission. Then, relevant Provincial Task Forces (PTF) and Islamabad Task Force (ICT TF) hold meetings at short intervals, convenes JIT upon receipt of its report and allows 15 days for JIT to conclude the case before forwarding it to COIED or referring it back for further investigation.

In the next stage, COIED conducts proceedings on each case, with participation from Police, law-enforcement agencies, intelligence agencies and the Home Department and examines investigation reports and witness statements. Last but not least, the Commission disposes of cases where appropriate and may issue Production Orders for missing persons concerned. Where a person remains untraced, the Commission may direct registration of a criminal case against officials responsible for alleged enforced disappearance.

Pakistan has taken concrete measures to address concerns of families of missing persons. In August 2024, the Federal Cabinet approved a Rs 5 million support package for each deserving family, with a total allocation of Rs 5 billion for 1,000 families. Missing Persons Commission was tasked with identifying eligible families and facilitating financial assistance.

Legal Remedies Matter: Judicial Oversight, Due Process and Accountability

Terrorism cases in Pakistan often fail to reach final conclusion through conventional prosecution. Judges handling terrorism cases may be targeted or killed while prosecutors and witnesses face similar threats, resulting in prolonged proceedings and appeals. Pakistan’s reported 8.7% terrorism prosecution rate over the past two decades, compared with 88% in the UK, 99% in China and 99.9% in Japan, highlights the scale of the prosecution challenge. Prolonged and inconclusive proceedings also create space for political fronts of terrorist organisations to exploit legal process and build victimhood narratives like missing persons and enforced disappearance.

Pakistan’s Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) 1997 provided an overarching legal framework for dealing with terrorism-related offences and suspects. However, it still remained short on the prosecution of terrorists affiliated with terrorist organisations like the banned Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and the banned Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA). It has been amended through the insertion of Section 11-EEEE, which provides for “Preventive Detention for Inquiry,” allowing detention for up to 90 days for the purpose of inquiry, thereby providing a legal mechanism for investigating terrorism suspects to collect evidence before moving to prosecute them.

Anti-Terrorism (Balochistan Amendment) Act 2025 incorporates amended ATA 1997 to the extent of Balochistan Province by inserting Section 11-EEEE, providing a legal framework for preventive detention for inquiry for up to 90 days, enabling relevant authorities and JITs to investigate terrorism suspects and collect evidence within a defined period.

Anti-Terrorism (Punjab Amendment) Act 2026 not only inserted provisions of 11-EEEE but also inserted Section 21-AAA, providing a special-security framework enabling Faceless Courts and enhanced protection for judges, prosecutors and witnesses.

This framework directly addresses the basis of missing persons allegations by ensuring that terrorism-related apprehension is traceable and subject to legal safeguards. However, the challenge does not end with investigation. Increasingly organised terrorist groups and criminal networks threaten not only law enforcement agencies but also prosecutors, judges and witnesses, making protection of the entire criminal-justice chain essential.

This is where Faceless Courts become an important component of the framework. These enable terrorism cases to proceed while protecting judges, prosecutors and witnesses from intimidation, retaliation and targeted attacks.

Under the Faceless Court mechanism, a select number of Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) judges and prosecutors, along with witnesses, are provided identity protection through confidential records, concealed signatures, confidential proceedings and voice masking, safeguarding them from intimidation, assassination or kidnapping.

Faceless Court models have international precedents. Colombia’s “jueces sin rostro” (faceless judges) system in the 1990s concealed identities of judges, prosecutors and witnesses through screens, two-way mirrors and voice distortion in cases involving drug trafficking, terrorism and organised crime. Similar protections exist under Italy’s Law No. 82 of 1991, the UK’s Coroners and Justice Act 2009, France’s Law No. 2016-731, Spain’s Organic Law 19/1994, Articles 226a–226f of the Netherlands’ Code of Criminal Procedure and Chile’s Law 21.577 of 2023, providing for witness anonymity, identity concealment and protective testimony arrangements in serious criminal cases.