A white paper may be issued acknowledging the Fata people’s role in promoting and defending Pakistan’s interests and stating in unambiguous terms the federation’s resolve to honour their rights. —AP/File photo

THE public debate on constitutional, legal and political reforms in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata) has begun not a moment too soon. Indeed, some people think the time for leisurely talks may have passed.

The fact remains that the battle for the hearts and minds of the tribal people will not end with a victory of arms over the militants. Fata needs a new deal more urgently than any other part of Pakistan.

The basic issues relating to Fata have been discussed in detail over the past many years. Briefly, these are: what should be the constitutional status of Fata? Should Fata be merged with the Frontier province or should it be made a separate provincial unit? What should the Frontier Crimes Regulation be replaced with? Should political parties be allowed in Fata? What kind of local government needs to be introduced there? What are the priorities regarding Fata’s socio-cultural-economic development?

A recent roundtable attended by most political parties that matter again showed that while considerable agreement on the future dispensation in Fata already exists, quite a few contentious issues have yet to be resolved.

For instance, all parties want Articles 246 and 247 of the constitution amended for three objectives. Firstly, the tag ‘tribal territory’, commonly described in Urdu as ‘ilaqa ghair’ (other people’s territory) must be discarded as it distorts the perspective on both sides. Secondly, the territory should be transformed from a president’s fief into a parliament-controlled area. And, thirdly, the area should fall under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

Similarly, most political parties readily agree, and for obvious reasons, that they should be allowed to operate in the area. For the sake of convenience one may endorse their call for the extension of the Political Parties Order, 2002, a Musharraf regime relic of doubtful value, to Fata, but it is time they devised a framework for political parties that could inspire public confidence in their democratic, responsible and transparent functioning.

The preparation of a local government plan appropriate to the area also should not be difficult. Avoiding the Musharraf regime’s mistake of treating all parts of Pakistan as uniformly developed and liable to be strapped under a single system, it should be possible to work out a local government scheme that can facilitate the Fata people’s initiation into post-tribal local self-government.

As regards the socio-economic development of the area, nobody will dispute the need to give priority to enlargement of economic activity, creation of jobs and establishment of educational and health institutions. But differences on the mode and mechanism of service delivery cannot be dismissed. This problem has not been solved in the rest of Pakistan either. The search for a model that is people-friendly (as opposed to parliamentarian-friendly) and free of a built-in facility for a corruption model may not be easy but is well worth the effort.

Thus we are left with two ticklish issues — FCR’s replacement and Fata’s provincial status.

Mr Yousuf Raza Gilani’s announcement immediately after his accession to the prime ministerial gaddi about the FCR’s annulment was in line with liberal thinking. However, it was soon realised that the extension of the so-called normal laws and court procedures, which might have been possible some decades ago, was no longer a workable proposition. The reasons were firstly, social changes in Fata as a result of the communication explosion, the Afghan war and the militant cleric’s success in supplanting the tribal malik, and, secondly, the Fata people’s distaste for and fear of Pakistan’s justice system.

As things stand, pragmatism may serve Pakistan better than idealism. This means that a new law should be made for the area that does not

have the obnoxious features of the FCR, such as the scheme of collective fines, destruction of offenders’ houses and absence of appeal provisions, and still retains the spirit of a community-managed system for adjudication. In order to avoid every case causing protracted litigation, petty cases and minor disputes could be resolved by democratically constituted juries with possibilities of appeal to superior judicial forums.

The moment a tactical accommodation of the Fata people’s sensibilities is mentioned, two questions are raised. First, it is said that no step that perpetuates the tribal system can be welcome. Among other things, this may trigger similar demands from elements that are in the process of transition from the tribal to post-tribal stage. Secondly, how will the rights of women and minorities be protected?

The first objection ignores the impossibility of a tribal society’s acceptance of non-tribal norms of personal and collective conduct without the abolition of tribal relations — economic, political and social. It also frees the state of Pakistan of its liability to pay for the cost of protecting, in its narrow interest, the tribal population against social change. The bills have to be paid now with compound interest. If the banner of Sharia is raised, for that too the state cannot escape responsibility.

As for the rights of women and minorities, guarantees for these have to be negotiated. It will be a test not only of Islamabad’s negotiating skills but also of its sincerity in upholding women’s and minorities’ rights as to how it presents these rights as non-negotiable values. Without such guarantees all talk of reform will be a hoax.

Somewhat harder is the determination of Fata’s provincial status. The Frontier political parties have a clear interest in seeking Fata’s merger with their province. The existence of some elements in Fata who support this idea cannot be denied. But nobody can say as to the strength of the people who wish Fata to be made a separate province. And are there no people who have reservations about coming under the Pakistani constitution itself?

The question obviously touches on the erosion of the confidence of the Fata people in Pakistan. There is no point in harping on these people’s 1947 decision to throw in their lot with Pakistan because that would raise the difficult question of whether the Pakistan government honoured its part of the bargain. Pakistan today is not the garden of promises it was in 1947. It is impossible to blame the Fata population for becoming wary of joining a family whose older members are behaving oddly, to say the least, and are pulling in different directions.

There is no gainsaying that this trust deficit, accumulated over six decades, cannot be instantly wiped out — especially when the means of accomplishing this are no better than clichés. However, before schemes of the advancement of Fata are unfolded the proclamation of a charter of its people’s rights and Islamabad’s commitment to upholding them may still help in winning over these vigorously and foolishly excluded people.

A white paper may be issued acknowledging the Fata people’s role in promoting and defending Pakistan’s interests and stating in unambiguous terms the federation’s resolve to honour their rights. The white paper must make it clear that while the wishes of the people of Fata to protect their traditions deserve respect no compromise on the rights of women and minority groups and on human rights, democracy and the rule of law can be contemplated as this will harm the tribal community itself the most by putting a cross on their right to social progress.