LAHORE: Punjab’s bid to overhaul its preventive policing framework has unfolded through two legislative initiatives over the past two years, highlighting the government’s evolving approach to organised crime as well as the constitutional and political concerns surrounding expanded surveillance powers.
What began in 2025 as a Home Department proposal resurfaced as a redesigned bill in the Punjab Assembly in 2026, only to be halted after an unprecedented intervention by the Punjab Assembly Speaker.
Legislative records show the proposed Punjab Control of Goondas and Anti-Social Behaviour Act, 2025, and the Punjab Control of Habitual Offenders and Anti-Social Behaviour Bill, 2026 were separate initiatives to replace Punjab’s decades-old preventive policing regime. While the 2025 proposal never completed the legislative process, the 2026 bill advanced much further before being halted over concerns about transparency, due process and its sweeping surveillance powers.
The government’s preventive policing overhaul has its roots in colonial laws. Legal historians trace it to the Criminal Tribes Act, 1871, which imposed registration, movement restrictions and police surveillance without ordinary judicial safeguards. Though repealed after independence, its preventive policing philosophy survived through the Restriction of Habitual Offenders (Punjab) Act, 1918, and the Punjab Control of Goondas Ordinance, 1959, which empowered authorities to monitor and restrict suspected habitual offenders and public nuisances.
These laws remained Punjab’s main preventive policing framework for decades. Officials argued they had become outdated as crime shifted to digital platforms, encrypted communications and organised online networks. The government said existing laws were ill-equipped to tackle offences such as cyberbullying, online extortion, cyberstalking, digital land grabbing, electronic financial fraud and weapon display on social media, prompting a proposal to combine preventive policing with modern technological surveillance.
The first step came in 2025 when the Punjab Home Department drafted the Punjab Control of Goondas and Anti-Social Behaviour Act, 2025.
Contrary to public perception, it never became law. After being sent to the Punjab Law Department for legal vetting, the draft remained under examination and was never tabled in the Assembly. It was therefore never debated, passed or enacted, remaining only an executive proposal despite generating official and legal debate. The policy objective, however, remained unchanged.
Instead, the government introduced the Punjab Control of Habitual Offenders and Anti-Social Behaviour Bill, 2026, retaining the goal of strengthening preventive policing while expanding technological surveillance of suspected habitual offenders.
Unlike the 2025 draft, it entered the formal legislative process. Introduced by Parliamentary Secretary for Law Khalid Mahmood Ranjha, the bill was approved by the Standing Committee on Law and returned to the Assembly. Its progress drew little attention until final consideration, when opposition lawmakers and legal experts raised concerns over both the legislative process and the bill’s sweeping powers.
The controversy peaked when opposition members questioned how such a far-reaching bill had advanced with little public debate. Punjab Assembly Speaker Malik Muhammad Ahmad Khan intervened, saying legislation affecting citizens’ rights required broader consultation, greater transparency and wider parliamentary scrutiny. Proceedings were halted and the bill withheld from final approval despite clearance by the Standing Committee on Law.
Opposition lawmakers, including Rana Aftab Ahmed Khan, argued the bill would expand executive surveillance beyond constitutional limits by allowing preventive restrictions on individuals without criminal convictions, raising concerns over due process, privacy and personal liberty.
The shift from the abandoned 2025 draft to the 2026 bill also reflected a change in legal philosophy. The earlier proposal relied on executive assessments of conduct and reputation, empowering District Intelligence Committees to identify suspected “goondas” or anti-social elements through intelligence and police reports, allowing preventive action even before any conviction.
