RASC News Agency: Taliban officials in Afghanistan’s northern Kunduz Province have acknowledged that their forces killed two men accused of being “armed thieves” during what they describe as an exchange of fire in the Imam Sahib district. Jumauddin Khaksar, spokesperson for the Taliban’s police command in Kunduz, stated that the incident took place on Tuesday, August 21, in a rural area near Imam Sahib. According to Khaksar, Taliban fighters recovered an AK-47 assault rifle and over 150,000 kabuli rupees in allegedly stolen cash from the bodies of the slain men.
However, no independent verification of the victims’ identities or of the Taliban’s claims has been provided a recurring feature of the group’s self-reported “law enforcement” operations. International human rights law is unequivocal: no individual may be deprived of life without due process of law. The right to a fair and impartial trial is a cornerstone of justice, regardless of the severity of alleged crimes. Extrajudicial killings whether of an accused individual or even of a convicted criminal constitute a direct violation of international norms and the most basic principles of human dignity.
Yet, the Taliban’s record since their return to power in 2021 demonstrates a systematic pattern of ignoring these fundamental rights. Over the past four years, rights monitors have documented hundreds of cases in which Taliban fighters executed individuals without trial. The victims have ranged from alleged petty thieves to political dissidents, former members of the Afghanistani security forces, journalists, and ordinary civilians. Often, the accusations appear to serve as a pretext for silencing critics or instilling fear, rather than addressing genuine criminal activity.
Legal experts describe this as state-sanctioned vigilantism acts of lethal force carried out not in the service of justice, but as a tool of intimidation. Such killings, typically framed as “swift justice” in Taliban-controlled media, are in fact an abuse of power designed to reinforce authoritarian control. They bypass not only fair trial procedures but also the very concept of lawful governance, replacing courts and evidence with the barrel of a gun.
What is particularly alarming is the Taliban’s willingness to publicise these acts, seemingly as a warning to others. This public theatre of violence serves a dual purpose: to project an image of uncompromising authority, and to normalise extrajudicial executions as an accepted even celebrated form of governance. Human rights defenders stress that without robust international oversight and mechanisms for accountability, Afghanistani civilians will remain defenceless against such abuses. The United Nations and other global bodies have repeatedly called for unfettered access to investigate these incidents, yet the Taliban continue to obstruct independent monitoring, while simultaneously restricting Afghanistani media from reporting freely.
Ultimately, the Taliban’s treatment of accused individuals reveals not the strength of their justice system, but its total absence. A functioning state punishes crime through evidence, law, and impartial judgment; the Taliban rule instead through fear, impunity, and the calculated erosion of human rights.
