According to the police, troops have been deployed in Lower Kurram. Sources indicate that the people of Kurram are opposed to the operation, asserting that a unilateral military operation is unacceptable.

Efforts to restore peace in the region through local jirgas and negotiations between conflicting tribes have remained unsuccessful, especially after an aid convoy was targeted by militants earlier this week. The convoy was carrying food and medical supplies to the area following a peace accord signed between the clashing tribes.

The Turi and Bangash tribes assert that more than 10 violations have occurred since the peace agreement, yet the government has not taken any action. They have warned that if the roads are not opened and security is not ensured, they will announce a declaration of separation from the peace agreement and will prepare their own agenda.

Government sources claim that those displaced as a result of the operation will be accommodated in camps in Lower Kurram.

Meanwhile, due to the prolonged closure of roads, two more children have died, taking the number of dead children to 157.

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post Military Operation Being Planned in Kurram As Violence Continues Despite Peace Deal appeared first on Dissent Today.

In a statement posted on its social media account, the HRCP said, “In response to today’s announcement that military courts have convicted 25 civilians for the PTI-led 9 May riots, HRCP reiterates its position that no civilian should be tried in a military court under any circumstances.”

The statement added that trials of civilians in military courts violate the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of Pakistan and the international human rights obligations to which Pakistan is a state party.

“All civilians accused of violence should have been prosecuted in civilian courts through open public proceedings to protect their right to due process and fair trial,” the statement said.

On Saturday, Pakistan jailed 25 civilians over attacks on military installations that took place following the arrest of former Prime Minister Imran Khan on May 9, 2023.

Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR), the military’s public relations wing, confirmed the development and added that a military court had given sentences between two and 10 years of “rigorous imprisonment”, with 14 facing a decade in prison.

Human rights activists have long expressed concerns over trials of civilians in military courts, arguing that the requirements for fairness and due process are not met by these courts.

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Condemns Conviction of Civilians by Military Courts appeared first on Dissent Today.

The IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq issued the notices while hearing a petition filed by a citizen named Atif Ali that demanded registration of a case against the two former generals as well as two journalists.

In his request, the petition said that interviews of the former army chief were done carelessly by the journalists, Javed Chaudhry and Shahid Maitla. He said that the journalists acted irresponsible in publishing the interviews.

According to the petitioner, the revelations that the former COAS made in the interview(s) flouted the Official Secrets Act and were equivalent to inciting mutiny and disharmony.

In March, the IHC registrar office had asked the petitioner to reach out to other relevant authorities as the high court was not the right forum for such a petition. But the petition was ultimately heard by the chief justice, and he ordered the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) DG to do what is required under the law. But the petitioner claimed, during the hearing, that the FIA took no action.

The chief justice then issued notices to all respondents, including Generals (r) Bajwa, Hameed, the two journalists, and the FIA.

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post Violation of Official Secrets Act: Ex-Army Chief Bajwa, Faiz Hameed Issued Notices By Court appeared first on Dissent Today.

In the summer of 1909, in the midst of a naval arms race with Germany, a group of national security hawks in Britain schemed to introduce stronger legislation to prevent German espionage. The legislation at the time, the Official Secrets Act of 1889, was deemed too weak given some of its provisions had been watered down by the Parliament. Their proposed new draft would increase the range of offenses to which the Act would apply, but fearing Parliamentary backlash, they decided to wait for sufficient national panic to develop before they would introduce the draft. 

When a German gunboat reached the port of Agadir in Morocco, it alarmed the British enough for the Official Secrets Act of 1911 to be passed by the Parliament. There was little debate or consideration over its provisions, and it passed through all stages in the Commons in just a day. Years later, this Act that would form the basis for a 1923 legislation under the same name in India – that the present-day Pakistan continues to hold onto. 

More than a century after the events of 1911, we saw Pakistan’s own Parliament using the rhetoric of national security to bulldoze amendments to the Official Secrets Act with no debate, or concern for fundamental rights.

To understand just how damaging to democracy and rule of law the amendments to the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (OSA) are, we first need to consider its original framework. The Act is built around two major offenses: espionage (section 3) and disclosure of state secrets (section 5). 

Section 5 gives a good sense of the overall problems that run throughout the OSA. In short, it deals with “wrongful communication of information” and states that if any person has in their possession a “secret” document or information and wilfully communicates it to any other person, or foreign power, they shall be guilty of an offense. 

This provision is inherently problematic. The OSA does not define what a “secret” document is, leaving the definition to the discretion of members of the executive. It also doesn’t define numerous other terms such as “foreign power”. This legislative ambiguity was intentional. The OSA was enacted to protect the colonial state. It therefore required that maximum discretion be left in the hands of executive functionaries so that the law could be adapted to any situation, and deal with any threat. Legal certainty was a small price to pay for a colonial apparatus that harboured deep distrust for the people it ruled over through force. 

The Official Secrets Act gives legal cover to the executive to label anything as secret information and prevent its disclosure. It is irrelevant whether this information may, for example, expose government corruption or misconduct. This insulates the state from accountability and transparency – two hallmarks of democracy. Sam Zarifi, the secretary general of the International Commission of Jurists, once summarised in the context of the OSA in Myanmar: “Just about anyone in possession of unpublished government documents could find themselves facing prosecution and the harsh penalties a conviction may carry. Under this law many good journalists could be prosecuted at any time.”

The Official Secrets Act was never made to enhance democratic rule, neither in Britain nor in the colonies. Secrecy was to be the dominant form of governance, as historians Peter Hennessy and Rob Shepherd writing for the Telegraph put it: “For the bulk of the 20th century the British government exhibited a genius for secrecy which made it a world leader for reticence among democracies. It was as if confidentiality was built into the calcium of a Whitehall policy-makers bones, whether they be minister or civil servant, almost as if they couldn’t help it.” 

Britain’s version of section 5 of the OSA was the identically worded section 2 of the 1911 Act. Its ambiguous and broad nature was such that one Home Office report stated that 2,000 separate criminal offences could be said to be brought under it. When in 1971 a committee was appointed to review the law it found section 2 “a mess”, referring to it as a “catch-all” whose “drafting and interpretation are obscure, people are not sure what it means, or how it operates in practice, or what kinds of action involve real risk of prosecution under it.”

This is the legislation that Pakistan’s Parliament amended – an Act steeped in anti-democratic history. When our Parliament sought to amend the Official Secrets Act, it had an opportunity to change this. Instead, Pakistan’s Parliament sought to retain the ambiguity of the law while further empowering the already substantial role the military plays in our country. An initial draft that granted the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and Intelligence Bureau (IB) to search any person or place without a warrant sailed through the lower house. Only because a faint sliver of democracy remained in the Senate were we able to prevent this complete capitulation to the establishment. 

The Official Secrets Act gives legal cover to the executive to label anything as secret information and prevent its disclosure. It is irrelevant whether this information may, for example, expose government corruption or misconduct

Yet the rest of the draft remained, and ended up becoming a law. These amendments undermine Pakistan’s democracy both in their substance and in the process that led to them. 

In substance, a slew of catch-all definitions are introduced. The definition of “document” includes everything from unwritten information, contracts, and agreements. An “enemy” can be anyone who engages with any group that may be deemed prejudicial to the safety and interest of Pakistan. It also adds new offenses, chief among them being the unauthorized disclosure of the identity of members of the intelligence agencies. These definitions would worry anyone familiar with how casually this country labels people “foreign agents” or groups as “foreign funded”. They also ensure that the problems already inherent in Section 5 are compounded. Any document can be secret, and any person can be caught within the broad definition of an “enemy”. Journalists are the most likely group of individuals to be caught in the crosshairs of the Official Secrets Act. This has been the case in numerous other jurisdictions where this law exists, such as when in 2002 journalist Iftikhar Gilani was arrested under the Official Secrets Act in India for having documents highlighting human rights abuse in Kashmir in his possession. 

We are supposed to take comfort in the fact that the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) is the investigative agency under the Act and requires a search warrant, but given the incredibly broad nature of the offences under the Act, the FIA may as well have free reign to arrest anyone it wants. This is in addition to the law’s existing provision which gives power to the armed forces to arrest any person, without a warrant, in the vicinity of a “prohibited place” on a reasonable suspicion of being involved in an offense under the Act. Given the long and broad list of prohibited places in the Act, as well as the number of military owned areas in the country, there is almost no limit to what can be achieved to curb dissent through the Official Secrets Act.

When the Parliament sought to amend the Official Secrets Act, it had an opportunity to change the anti-democratic history of the law . Instead, the Parliament sought to retain the ambiguity while further empowering the already substantial role the military plays in Pakistan.

One could argue that laws on espionage and state secrets are necessary. Yet, the problem is that these laws are left intentionally vague, overbroad, and disproportionate so that they can be used to stamp out rights such as freedom of speech and information. Such laws enhance Pakistan’s civil-military imbalance rather than reigning it in. Had Parliament considered how this law may be abused, it may have been more circumspect. It may have, for example, considered adding a ‘public interest’ defense to the law, protections for journalists, and narrowed the scope and ambit of Section 5 as the UK did to its own legislation in 1989. However, a Parliament that was supposed to represent the people, was too busy representing the interests of the establishment. After all, the initial draft of the amendments demonstrates that these amendments were being introduced for the establishment. 

A 2006 report in India on the Official Secrets Act once said that it was introduced in a “colonial climate of mistrust of people and primacy of public officials in dealing with citizens. OSA created a culture of secrecy. Confidentiality became the norm and disclosure the exception.” In Pakistan, it seems little has changed since then. 

Hassan A Niazi

The writer is a lawyer and former member of the visiting faculty at the Lahore University of Management Sciences. He did his LL.M. from New York University where he was a Hauser Global Scholar. He is currently based in Singapore.

The post Official Secrets Act: How Parliament Surrendered Democracy to the Military Establishment appeared first on Dissent Today.

Pakistan today faces an unprecedented crisis. Never before has it faced such serious challenges – with the country so deeply divided and in a fractured state. In fact, it confronts a polycrisis – several crises that have converged to reinforce each other and create an overall challenge tougher to deal with than any single crisis. A political crisis, with constitutional implications rages, the economic crisis is the worst in the country’s history, while a resurgence of terrorist violence has revived threats to Pakistan’s security.

The complex nature of the country’s overlapping and interconnected challenges and the fact that no single party can tackle these on its own should make political leaders and other stakeholders rise above narrow interests and consider evolving agreement on core issues, even as they continue to compete with each other.

Here are some core issues that need to be addressed immediately.

Economic revival and growth

First and foremost, Pakistan needs economic recovery and a plan to achieve this. While the present focus is on reviving the IMF loan programme, it should be a part, not substitute for a broader homegrown economic strategy. Stabilisation measures are necessary but not sufficient. Pakistan needs a path to growth and investment and a strategy to fix structural problems to end the vicious cycle of high budget/balance of payments deficits and chronic foreign exchange crises that have led to repeated IMF bailouts – a grand total of 23 now.

Unless underlying structural issues are tackled, the country will not be able to escape the trap of slow growth, low savings and investment, high deficits, heavy borrowing, growing indebtedness and soaring inflation. A band-aid approach is unsustainable. Consensus on longer term, structural measures is needed.
The narrow tax base, reflected in a low and almost stagnant tax to GDP ratio, is the source of fiscal problems, which is why serious tax reform needs to be a priority. This should aim at an equitable, simple and nationally enforced regime to give the country a single tax system. Ending exemptions, simplifying the convoluted sales tax structure, and ensuring tax compliance should be part of reform actions. Pakistan also needs to square the circle between over-taxation and under-collection.

The energy crisis is taking a heavy toll on the economy and testing people’s patience. That gives power sector reform urgency. Similarly, agreement is essential on privatising loss-making, state-owned enterprises that bloat budget deficits. A single, liberal business regulatory framework for the country and commitments for policy continuity are crucial to build and sustain investor confidence. The State Bank’s operational autonomy with the market deciding the exchange rate should also be agreed.

Unless there is an economic vision that puts in place a plan to grow and diversify exports, increase productivity, enhance competitiveness, boost savings and investment and integrate the country’s economy into the global economy, Pakistan will not be able to find a sustainable path to economic growth and prosperity.

Consensual democracy. Political stability, on which economic revival depends, requires consensus between all stakeholders, not just on continuance of democracy but its functioning by tolerance, mutual accommodation and consensus. Democracy cannot be limited to the ballot box. It should determine how the country is governed between elections. The federal nature of the polity makes this imperative – as does the regionalisation of politics and electoral outcomes that leaves different provinces in the hands of political parties different from the one leading the federal government. The federal government has to work with and not against opposition-run provinces to build inter-provincial consensus on major issues. While the central government can enact laws and take reform measures, their enforcement requires the consent of all provinces.

The role of the military is another core area that needs agreement. We have a firm popular consensus in place: that elected representatives should be in charge of governance. This indicates the delegitimisation of military intervention in politics and governance in public eyes. But political leaders must also embrace this consensus and not try to drag the army into politics to fight their battles. The military too should respect the principle of civilian supremacy even though on security policy it will continue to have a significant voice. This civil-military rebalancing of power will help to promote political stability.

Education

No issue is more consequential to a secure and prosperous Pakistan than the coverage and quality of education available to our children. Yet the facts remain grim. Pakistan has the world’s second highest number of children out of school, 22.8 million. 12 million are girls. It means 44 % of children aged 5 to 16 years do not go to school. This violates the constitutional obligation set out in Article 25A that enjoins the state to “provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of five to sixteen years”. Of those who go to school, drop-out rates are high. All this is the result of decades of neglect and chronic under spending on education by successive governments. At 2.6 percent of GDP, this is among the lowest in South Asia.

Political leaders should stop trying to drag the army into politics to fight their battles. The military, too, should respect the principle of civilian supremacy even though on security policy it will continue to have a significant voice.

Given Pakistan’s demographic profile, young people face a jobless and hopeless future unless the scale and quality of education is expanded. This should spur the country’s leaders into treating education as a national emergency. Pakistan needs champions of reform not champions of vacuous rhetoric on education.

Population planning

Pakistan’s population of over 224 million makes it the world’s fifth most populous nation. In 2040, the population is projected to reach 302 million. The annual growth rate of around 2 % is among the highest in the region. This has far-reaching economic and social consequences. Yet this pivotal issue rarely figures in any government’s priorities.

The demographic structure, with youth constituting 64% of the population under 30, means almost 4 million young people join the working age population every year. This in turn requires 1.4 million new jobs to be created annually, according to a UNDP report. The confluence of demographics, economic stagnation and persisting education and gender gaps confronts Pakistan with the specter of social instability, even social breakdown in the decades ahead if consensus is not forged on population control measures.

These fundamental issues among other critical ones, including water scarcity and climate change, will determine Pakistan’s fate and fortunes. They require implementable plans undergird by a solid political and public consensus. Otherwise, Pakistan will continue to lurch from crisis to crisis without the means to get rid of the political and economic mess that it is perpetually trapped in.

Maleeha Lodhi

The writer is an academic and a diplomat. She served as Pakistan’s Ambassador to the US, High Commissioner to the UK and Permanent Representative to the United Nations.

The post Needed: National Consensus On These 4 Core Issues appeared first on Dissent Today.

According to an initial police report, Asif, who is enrolled in the English Department of the university, runs a social media page “Asif Rebellion” wherein he criticises Pakistan Army.

The report, which is doing the rounds on social media, added that he runs “propaganda posts” on social media against state institutions and security agencies.

Gomal University student, Asif Rebellion,faces sedition charges for alleged hate posts against the army on Facebook.Police conducting raids in university to apprehend him.
Criticism & opinion z the basic right of every individual.
#AsifRebellion #GomalUniversity #SeditionCharges pic.twitter.com/7tR3y6TLBy

— Adnan Bitani (@AdnanBitani) March 29, 2023

The police are yet to apprehend the student.

Earlier, a court in Peshawar sentenced a Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) activist to 26 months in jail for criticising the army chief and Pakistan Army, burning the national flag, and making its video viral on social media.

The court also imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on him.

The convict, who was residing in a Gulf country at the time, had recorded a video and uploaded it on social media wherein he was shown putting on fire Pakistan’s national flag and also uttering “derogatory remarks” against the Pakistan Army and the chief of army staff after the removal of former prime minister Imran Khan through a vote of no-confidence in April 2022.

The convict was arrested at the airport on his return in June 2022.

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post Sedition Case Filed Against DI Khan Varsity Student For Criticising Army On Social Media  appeared first on Dissent Today.

In a Pakistan Bar Council’s Press Release making rounds on social media, it said that Pakistan Bar Council Vice Chairman Haroon-ur-Rashid and Executive Committee of Pakistan Bar Council Chairman Hassan Raza Pasha have expressed “serious concerns” over the matter.

The Press Release also said, “the illegal practice of donating out of the public resources to the army is neither justified nor acceptable to the people of Pakistan”.

The bar council senior members said the notification should be immediately withdrawn, otherwise, the council will pursue the matter in court.

Well done Pakistan Bar Council. Apportioning state lands like a melon must be challenged, resisted. Look at the timing of it. A weak caretaker government in place, political turmoil & militants regrouping, everyone’s attention is focused on existential threats pic.twitter.com/O3hRkfNWMp

— Farhatullah Babar (@FarhatullahB) March 28, 2023

Earlier, the caretaker Punjab government has handed over at least 45,267 acres of land in three districts — Bhakkar, Khushab, and Sahiwal — of the province to the Pakistan Army for “Corporate Agriculture Farming”.

According to a letter making rounds on social media, the military land directorate wrote to the provincial officials, including the Punjab chief secretary, Board of Revenue, and secretaries of the agriculture, forest, livestock, and irrigation departments for handing over of at least 45,267 acres land in districts Bhakkar, Khushab, and Sahiwal to the Pakistan Army.

The letter reminded the provincial officials of Joint Venture Agreement signed between the army and the Punjab government on March 8, 2023, wherein it was decided that the said land would be handed over to the Pakistan Army.

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post Pakistan Bar Council Objects To Handing Over Of More Than 45,000 Acres Punjab Land To Army  appeared first on Dissent Today.

According to a letter making rounds on social media, the military land directorate wrote to the provincial officials, including the Punjab chief secretary, Board of Revenue, and secretaries of the agriculture, forest, livestock, and irrigation departments for handing over of at least 45,267 acres land in districts Bhakkar, Khushab, and Sahiwal to the Pakistan Army.

Land that is 60% the size of the Maldives was just given to the Army for corporate farming.

In Bhakkar, Khushab and Sahiwal: more than 45,000 acres. https://t.co/9Dt9AMegEV

— Fasi Zaka (@fasi_zaka) March 16, 2023

The letter reminded the provincial officials of Joint Venture Agreement signed between the army and the Punjab government on March 8, 2023, wherein it was decided that the said land would be handed over to the Pakistan Army.

The development comes amid Pakistan’s economic crisis as the government is in negotiations with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) related to the completion of the ninth review of a $7 billion loan programme.

Once the deal is signed, the lender will disburse a tranche of more than $1 billion from the $6.5 billion bailout agreed to in 2019, which will serve as a lifeline for the cash-strapped country.

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post Punjab Govt Hands Over 45,000 Acres Land To Pakistan Army For ‘Corporate Farming’ appeared first on Dissent Today.

The court also imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on him.

The convict, who was residing in a Gulf country at the time, had recorded a video and uploaded it on social media wherein he was shown putting on fire Pakistan’s national flag and also uttering “derogatory remarks” against the Pakistan Army and the chief of army staff after the removal of former prime minister Imran Khan through a vote of no-confidence in April 2022.

The convict was arrested at the airport on his return in June 2022.

Earlier, a court in Faisalabad sentenced a social media activist, Sikander Zaman, to three-year imprisonment and imposed a heavy fine on him for criticising Pakistan Army.

The social media activist has 184 followers on Twitter and his handle is rife with posts related to Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post PTI Activist Gets 26 months In Peshawar Jail For Criticising Pakistan Army, Burning National Flag  appeared first on Dissent Today.

The HRCP statement comes days after a court in Faisalabad sentenced a social media activist to three-year imprisonment and imposed a heavy fine on him for criticising Pakistan Army.

HRCP expresses deep concern over recent government efforts to amend the PPC and CrPC, expanding the scope of the current defamation laws and stipulating five years’ imprisonment ‘for scandalising or ridiculing’ the judiciary or army. pic.twitter.com/fSFRPrafPC

— Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (@HRCP87) February 16, 2023

A bill, titled Criminal Laws (Amendment) Act, 2023, is under consideration by cabinet members.

According to the bill, whoever makes, publishes, circulates any statement or disseminates information, through any medium, with an intention to ridicule or scandalise the judiciary, the armed forces or any of their member will be guilty of an offence punishable with imprisonment of up to five years or with a fine which may extend to Rs1 million or with both.

The legislation also proposes that the offender be arrested without a warrant and calls for the offence to be non-bailable and non-compoundable which could only be challenged in a sessions court.

Currently, the punishment for such an offence is three-year imprisonment with heavy fines.

While expressing concern over the government’s efforts to amend the bill, the HRCP said that “enforcing such measures would be antithetical to the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression”.

Earlier in a cabinet session, the lawmakers, mainly from Pakistan People’s Party, within the ruling alliance contested the proposed law. They termed the proposed amendments to the penal code against basic human rights.

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Concerned Over Bill Seeking 5-Year Punishment For ‘Ridiculing Institutions’ appeared first on Dissent Today.