VIEWPOINT: Drop this draconian regulation

The government is all set to enforce a draconian law entitled "Regulation to Provide Actions in Aid of Civil Power in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA)". Both the federal cabinet and President Zardari are said to have approved the draft of the regulation, to be implemented soon via a presidential ordinance.
Some details appearing in a section of the press reveal that the security forces are to get arbitrary powers to arrest and prosecute people on a variety of suspicions. This should worry us all, particularly in view of the fact that our law enforcement agencies have a track record of enforced disappearances, torture and extrajudicial killings.
The regulation contains a number of provisions that militate against established norms of civilised behaviour. First of all, according to the draft document, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa governor is to appoint an armed forces officer as the 'Interning Authority' who may name any other officer as the 'Interning Authority' having the power to "intern any person who may not be in the defined areas (Fata), but is suspected of having committed acts or has nexus with actions pertaining to terrorism." That means military men will have sweeping powers to arrest and detain people everywhere in the country. No one would be safe; any person in any part of the country may be locked up on mere suspicion. And the internment would be open-ended (like what George W Bush did to hundreds of innocent and not-so-innocent people at the infamous Guantanamo Bay prison) as the draft document says "the power to intern shall be valid from the day when this regulation is deemed to have come into force, or . . . till the continuation of action in aid of civil power."
As one reads on, the draft document becomes more and more offensive. Transgressions would not be challengeable in a court of law. If any abuse or misuse of force by the armed forces during action in aid of civil authority is alleged or attributed, says the draft regulation, only the armed forces would probe the issue. Which merits the question, what if the armed forces resort to torture and extrajudicial killings as a policy?
Yet another provision says a person "suspected of an act of challenging the writ of the state" or any act that threatened peace and fundamental rights of the people shall be deemed as a criminal. And that the law would be deemed to have taken effect from February 2008. This retroactive provision seems to be aimed at consigning to a legal black hole the enforced disappearances of Bloch nationalists, hundreds of whom remain 'missing'.
The regulation also deals with the areas the military has cleared of insurgents, saying "continuous stationing of armed forces in territories that have been secured from miscreants in FATA is necessary; and it is heretofore imperative that a proper authorisation be given to the armed forces to take certain measures for incapacitating the miscreants by interning them during the continuation of the actions in aid of civil power." The Army ought to transfer administrative control of the secured areas to civil administration so that it can start rehabilitation and reconstruction work and try to restore normality. It may be necessary for the troops to stay on to ensure the militants do not return, but their role must be to bolster civil power rather than to act as controlling authority. The provision regarding authorising the armed forces "to take certain measures" is sure to cause abuse scandals. For the soldiers know only one way of dealing with trouble, which is use of force. They are trained to rely on the power of the gun to vanquish the enemy, not to create peace. Press reports say tribal leaders have already been conveying their fears about the proposed regulation to the provincial government.
There is no denying that this state and society face extraordinary challenges which call for extraordinary measures. The law enforcement agencies have been complaining that their efforts to nab terrorists often come to naught when suspects are produced in courts. Witnesses are too scared to step forward and testify, with the result that most suspects get released. Hence the argument for special powers to deal with challenge of extremist violence. The US introduced special measures in the aftermath of 9/11 terrorist attacks under the "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools, Act" better known by its acronym PATRIOT Act. It gave the law enforcement agencies some intrusive surveillance and investigation powers, such as wiretapping, searching telephone records, e-mails, and financial transactions. Still, it came under a lot of criticism from rights groups for its impingement on civil liberties and democratic freedoms. Here we are talking of giving security agencies arbitrary powers to treat people in whichever way they like, without recourse to appeal in a court of law. That is a recipe for disaster.
The law enforcement agencies do not work hard enough to prepare the prosecution case which can stand in the court. Given the inherent difficulties they must reduce reliance on witnesses, and improve intelligence and investigation work. Redress of legal inadequacies may also be necessary, but that must be done with the approval of Parliament. The government should drop its decision to implement, through an ordinance, a law that involves profoundly sensitive issues. The state cannot, must not, act like violent extremists who have no respect for other peoples' rights and lives. At no time should an elected, democratic government abdicate its responsibility to protect and preserve fundamental rights and civil liberties as guaranteed by the Constitution.
The government also needs to take a wider view of the problem. Poverty in its worst forms exists in the tribal areas most affected by insurgency. Press reports have long been pointing out that the militant outfits have so much money that they recruit unemployed youth as fighters on salaries that are much bigger than what the army pays its soldiers. It is also known that a lot of this money flows from the rich Middle Eastern countries, like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and the UAE to certain extremist organisations in the settled areas as well as the FATA based Taliban, which is used to hire recruits and buy weapons. Islamabad must approach all these governments and tell them to stop sending money to violent extremists undermining the peace and security of this country.
saida_fazal@yahoo.com