Balochistan – When the Baloch Liberation Front (BLF) recently released a photo honouring slain militant Shehak Baloch alias Aashob, it reignited Pakistan’s long-running debate on missing persons, blurring the line between “self-disappearance” and enforced disappearance.
For more than two decades, the issue of missing persons has remained a subject of intense debate in Pakistan. Human rights activists, relatives of the missing, and their families have consistently raised accusations against intelligence agencies. Some internal and external lobbies have also used this narrative as an anti-state diatribe, ostensibly aimed at maligning Pakistan. Courts too have been seized of the matter, urging the government and security agencies to resolve the issue.
The Case of Shehak Baloch
BLF itself honoured one of its militants, Shehak Baloch alias Aashob, killed along with three others in a Pakistan security forces operation on 17 September 2025 in Khuzdar District, Balochistan.
Pakistan’s military media wing confirmed that the operation was carried out on intelligence about “terrorists belonging to Indian proxy, Fitna al Hindustan,” a label the government of Pakistan uses for Baloch militant outfits allegedly funded by India.
“Weapons, ammunition and explosives were also recovered from the terrorists, who remained actively involved in numerous terrorist activities in the area,” said the Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR).
Contradictions in the Missing Persons Narrative
The case drew wider attention because The Balochistan Post (TBP) had earlier reported Shehak’s disappearance. According to TBP, on May 29, 2024, “armed men [allegedly Pakistan’s security forces] in plain clothes” detained six people from A1 City’s Phase 1, Arif Plaza area, Quetta. While three detainees were released, three, including Shehak, remained missing.
Baloch Voice for Justice confirmed in a press release that the six students had been taken and shifted to an undisclosed location. The detainees, residents of Turbat in Kech, were living in Quetta for their studies.
Human rights advocates and lawyers such as Imaan Mazari and Jibran Nasir have long raised their voices on the issue of enforced disappearances, frequently criticizing the role of the state. In Shehak’s case , however reported with another name, senior journalist Hamid Mir wrote on X that he was a photographer and videographer who had first been disappeared and later killed, presenting him as a “picture of oppression.” Questioning the system, Mir asked: “Will this young man ever get justice?”
Not an Isolated Case
This is not the first instance where individuals once reported as missing later reappeared as militants.
On 25 July 2024, groups such as Paank and Baam reported Sohaib Langove as a missing person. A year later, his name surfaced in a BLA press release, announcing that he had been killed as a terrorist in an intelligence-based operation in Kalat. Videos and photos later emerged showing Sohaib participating in protests alongside Mahrang Langove. He reportedly served as her personal guard and was also identified as her cousin.
These revelations have raised questions about the credibility of activists like Mahrang Langove and their supporters: whether their protests are a genuine call for justice or a soft cover for militant sympathizers.
As the Chief Minister of Balochistan put it: “There is a huge difference between self-disappearance and enforced disappearance.”
Legislative Efforts
To address the issue, the Government of Balochistan passed legislation binding security forces to:
- Inform families of any detained person.
- Produce detainees before a magistrate within 24 hours.
- Keep them in civilian centres with weekly medical inspections.
Meanwhile, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has been actively involved. Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani directed the Attorney General and the Ministry of Defense to nominate an officer for an in-camera briefing on missing persons.
The IHC also directed the federal government to develop a compensation policy for families of genuine victims of enforced disappearance. For instance, in one case, the Ministry of Interior’s special committee declared the family of missing citizen Omar Abdullah eligible for assistance. His wife, Zainab Zaeem Khan, was granted Rs 5 million, to be directly transferred into her account.
The court further noted that 572 people were declared as forcibly disappeared in the last five years.
Role of the Commission of Inquiry
The Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances (COIED) has played a crucial role. It acts as a coordinating entity for law enforcement and intelligence agencies, while also liaising with international organizations.
As of August 2025:
- Out of 10,618 registered cases, 8,873 (83.56%) have been disposed of since March 2011.
- Of these, the whereabouts of 6,809 persons were traced.
- 1,745 cases remain under investigation across registries in Islamabad, Karachi, Quetta, and Lahore.
- In August 2025 alone, 103 cases were disposed of and 11 new cases registered.
Human Rights Advocacy and Credibility Challenges
Despite institutional and legal measures, human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), and Defence of Human Rights (DHR) continue to campaign against enforced disappearances. However, repeated episodes in which people previously reported as missing later appear on militant press materials have complicated the discourse and, in the view of many state institutions and parts of the public, weakened the credibility of some advocacy claims.
The debate on enforced disappearances in Pakistan remains deeply complex, entangled in narratives of human rights, state security, and militant exploitation. While undeniable cases of wrongful detentions exist, the repeated emergence of “missing persons” as active militants exposes a gray zone that both weakens the credibility of advocacy campaigns and complicates the pursuit of justice.
At the same time, when figures such as Jørgen Watne Frydnes, a member of the Norwegian Nobel Committee and Secretary General of PEN Norway, campaign for Mahrang Langove’s Nobel Peace Prize, it raises difficult questions. Her proximity to individuals later identified as militants, while continuing to project enforced disappearances as a one-sided state-driven narrative, casts shadows not only on her activism but also on the legitimacy of such international endorsements.
Bridging this gap requires transparent mechanisms, consistent accountability, and a clear separation between genuine victims and those leveraging the issue for militant propaganda. Only then can the missing persons crisis move from a cycle of accusations and denials toward lasting resolution.
