Authorities and courts in Faisalabad have sparked widespread outrage after a Sessions Court granted custody of 13-year-old Christian girl Amber Nadeem to the man accused of abducting her. The decision has alarmed human rights defenders and exposed serious weaknesses in Pakistan’s child protection framework and judicial conduct.
On 12 June 2026, Mohsin Liaquat allegedly abducted Amber. Police registered FIR No. 838/26 under Section 365-B of the Pakistan Penal Code. After recovering her, officials placed her in protective custody at the Gender-Based Violence Unit. When she appeared before a Judicial Magistrate, Amber stated that the accused’s family had pressured her to falsely claim she was an adult. Despite this, the accused presented documents asserting that she had converted to Islam and married him.
These documents raise serious concerns. They list Amber’s date of birth as June 2008, even though her parents married in 2012—an inconsistency that strongly suggests fabrication. The court initially acknowledged these contradictions, ordered a medical examination, and placed her in a government shelter home. However, on 25 July 2026, the Sessions Court reversed course, granted custody to the accused, and released him on bail.
Human rights advocates have strongly condemned this decision. By returning a minor to the custody or influence of her alleged abductor, the court has exposed her to risks of conversion, abuse, and exploitation. Critics argue that the judiciary has failed in its fundamental duty to protect vulnerable victims, particularly children.
Ashiknaz Khokhar criticized authorities for disregarding official birth records and credible evidence, warning that courts must not allow fabricated documents or coerced statements to override child protection safeguards. Lala Robin Daniel also warned that such rulings risk normalizing child marriage and abuse, stressing that marrying a child, registering such a marriage, and cohabiting with a minor all constitute criminal offences under Pakistani law.
The case highlights a persistent pattern. Across Pakistan, particularly involving minority girls, authorities continue to report abductions followed by forced conversions and marriages, later validated in courtrooms. Despite laws such as the Punjab Child Marriage Restraint Act, 2026, enforcement remains weak, selective, or absent. Courts repeatedly entertain disputed claims, overlook conversions, and sideline clear evidence regarding age—especially when cases intersect with religion and minority status.
International concern is also growing. In July 2026, the European Parliament urged Pakistan to investigate these patterns, prosecute those responsible, and strengthen protections for victims. Yet, outcomes like this continue to erode public trust and raise serious questions about judicial accountability.
Pakistan’s legal system does not merely fail by accident—it fails by pattern. Courts continue to grant relief to accused individuals while leaving victims exposed, reinforcing a dangerous reality where legal loopholes and social pressure outweigh the rights of a child. These are not isolated incidents but part of a broader, deeply troubling trend.
What makes this case truly devastating is not just the failure of one court, but the message it sends to every vulnerable child—that even when they speak, even when evidence exists, the system may still return them to the very hands they fear. Amber Nadeem is not just a case file; she is a child whose safety was treated as secondary. When institutions meant to protect instead enable harm, the damage becomes deeply human. How many more children must endure this before the system finally chooses justice over silence?