THE targeting of Justice Maqbool Baqar’s convoy in Karachi on Wednesday morning is a clear message from religious militants that even a high court judge with a significant security detail is within their reach. The incident is probably the first of its kind where such a high-ranking jurist has been targeted. While the fact that the Sindh High Court judge survived the attack was nothing short of a miracle, a number of people — mostly policemen and Rangers in his entourage — died in the bomb attack that left no doubt of its intensity. Surely, the number of fatalities could have been reduced if the unfortunate men had been equipped with protective gear. Claiming responsibility for the bombing, the Pakistani Taliban have said Justice Baqar, a member of the Shia community, was targeted due to his “anti-Taliban and anti-Mujahideen decisions”. The judge was also believed to be on Lashkar-i-Jhangvi’s hit list while a TTP suspect arrested in Karachi last year told police that Maqbool Baqar was among his intended targets. The jurist had served as the administrative judge of the anti-terrorism courts in Karachi andinitially heard terrorism cases in this capacity.

When a judge of the seniority and stature of Justice Baqar can so easily be targeted, how can we expect judges from lower courts to move actively on cases to convict terrorism suspects? In the aftermath of the attack, perhaps it will not be surprising if lower court judges refuse to hear terrorism cases. That is why, as this newspaper has frequently pointed out, a proper system is required to protect judges, lawyers and witnesses involved in anti-terrorism cases. The intimidation and threats these individuals face plays a major part in keeping the conviction rate low. Unless this changes, we cannot expect progress when it comes to convicting militants. While senior judges do have adequate security, as in Justice Baqar’s case, the security arrangements for ATC judges and prosecutors are insufficient, which means those on the front line of the legal battle against militancy are exposed to considerable danger. It is hoped Wednesday’s incident will trigger a rethink in the way terrorism cases are heard and conducted in Pakistan.

And while reform is needed where the security of individuals associated with anti-terrorism cases is concerned, the larger issue is that of addressing the menace of sectarian and jihadi militancy. The fact remains that until the jihadi infrastructure is dismantled by the security and intelligence apparatus, judges, lawmakers, government officials, security personnel and common citizens will continue to be open, ‘soft’ targets for militants.