Cynics say the Prime Minister’s secretariat has become “Committee Chowk”. On the face of dilution of an uneasy national consensus, people are desperately looking for discreet action against militants. So far fifteen committees have been formed, out of which 11 are to be headed by interior minister—a single integrated committee would have been a better option. This gives a clear impression that traditional methods are being applied which would certainly delay action; some even fear that may be the National Action Plan is destined to suffer “death by committee”!
Action plan has unnecessarily broadened the scope of activity by including action against militants in Balochistan, Karachi and Punjab. Though these issues need attention, mixing-up everything has inherent disadvantages: effort would dilute and adversely impact on the outcome; and chances of misuse of upcoming laws and judicial processes would increase. Government would do much better by not mixing the law and order situations with terrorism. Even though there are linkages between these pockets of violence, each calls for a separate and specialized treatment.
At the same time, Prime Minister has done the right thing by not taking into consideration any external pressure regarding implementation of death penalty. In the latest of such pressures, the UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon while expressing condolence on Peshawar incident urged Prime Minister to take back decision for execution on death penalty. Prime Minister stated that killers of children were not worthy for any mercy and all legalities would be ensured before execution. Prime Minister must stick to his point and should ward off any internal or external pressures. UN and European Union need to feel the agony of thousands of families living in Pakistan that have suffered at the hands of terrorists. Every country has the right to secure better future for its citizens and so does Pakistan. At the same time it should be made sure that no innocents are prosecuted.
The political parties have agreed to establish the military courts because of extra-ordinary conditions that our country is faced with. Majority of the constitutional experts are against the setting up of military courts. Some political parties have termed the courts a bitter pill which they would swallow for the best interest of the country. Therefore, utmost care should be taken at every step of legislation in this regard. The military courts should only be used against terrorists. General Raheel Sharif has assured that military courts will work within law and according to mandate given by the parliament. There should be clarification about the cases that would be taken to these courts and there should be complete and clear definition of terrorism.
In his televised address, the prime minister said that the December 16 Peshawar school massacre has drawn a line between ‘coward’ terrorists and the Pakistani nation. “A line has been drawn. On one side are coward terrorists and on the other side stands the whole nation,” he said. “The Peshawar atrocity has changed Pakistan. We need to eradicate the mindset of terrorism to defeat extremism and sectarianism,” he said. “This horrendous attack has shaken the nation as the terrorists attacked the future of this country.”
Logistics and funding of terrorist outfits are an important aspect; lot of money flowing in under very noble banners is ending up in financing terrorism via sectarian organizations. While mobilization from domestic donations forms only a small fraction, major chunks come from some of the friendly countries for whom Pakistan is a battle ground for their proxy sectarian. It will be an uphill task to find ways and means to trace and choke such funding.
It would be naïve to view extremism and terrorism in Pakistan in isolation. Phenomenon shares causes and draws inspiration from what all is happening in Afghanistan and the Middle East. Political retrofitting of most of the Middle Eastern countries in the wake of Arab Spring did raise hopes in this part of the world also. Such hopes were irrelevant and oversimplification; so replication did not happen. Some countries, like Egypt, returned to status quo ante, thus dampening the hopes for their replication elsewhere. However, some countries like Iraq and Syria slipped in to a never ending anarchic situation and formation of principalities under various brands. This has once again raised the hopes of militants to follow that approach. Like the first approach, this one also has no scope for replication in South Asia. Nevertheless, caution is due to create adequate hedge through effective governance measures.
The consensus that Prime Minster has mobilized is conditional and time bound. If high profile terrorist activities continue, then the shaky consensus would meltdown. It does not take rocket science to restore law and order provided a feeling is radiated that anyone doing such acts will not be able to get away with it. This basically needs two steps: equality before law and tracking down the perpetrators of such acts beyond Pakistan’s borders and bringing them to justice. Fortunately, as of now, both these are achievable. If political considerations are kept apart, justice could be administered speedily and across the board. Moreover, unprecedented support from the Afghan government provides a chance of retrieving back the master minds residing in Afghanistan. Special operations remain an option should the willing support from Afghan government fizzle out.
Shortcomings of judiciary have yet again come to fore. Unpleasant decision of setting up military courts owes its genesis to failure of the judicial processes to finalize the cases within the time frame stipulated by the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 and Protection of Pakistan Act 2014. According to Sub-section 7 of Section 19 of the ATA 1997, “the anti-terrorism court shall on taking cognizance of the case, proceed with the trial from day to day and shall decide the case within seven working days.” In the wake of Peshawar tragedy, Chief Justice of Pakistan Nasirul Mulk chaired the meeting of the chief justices of all high courts and in-charge monitoring judges of high courts at the Supreme Court. He directed the participants of meeting and the anti-terrorism courts (ATCs) to conduct daily hearings as per the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) 1997 so as to ensure speedy disposal of terrorism-related cases. On perusal of reports received from the high court/ATCs, it came to fore that only 10-15% of cases pertained to bomb blasts/attacks by proscribed organizations/elements while the rest of the cases tried in these courts only technically fell within the definition of terrorism. Hence, there is a need to set our fundamentals right before we move to conquer terrorism—terrorism must be precisely defined.
National consensus, which has under currents of conditionalities and limited time offer, has placed an enormous responsibility on the government. It should be cautious that in an attempt to appear doing everything, it may not miss out on core areas. Terrorist have to execute a high profile activity every 2-3 months to remain relevant, government has to be vigilant 24/7 to thwart this. Moreover, terrorist can fail in their attempts and still remain relevant; government does not have the luxury of failure. Peace must return in Pakistan whether through military courts or through civilian courts.
