IN a country where political and religious leaders often fall victim to extremism, there is a dire need to understand the linkages between the health of a democracy and the level of radicalisation in society. Democracy relies on the inclusion of all in the political process, which requires individuals to engage in dialogue and find peaceful means of addressing grievances. Therefore, we must ask: how can tolerance be promoted? Is it possible without freedom of speech, the rule of law, access to justice, and respect for fundamental human rights?

For democratic societies, it is imperative for the state to ensure a balance between individual freedoms and collective security. Radicalisation usually stems from alienation, disenfranchisement or frustration with political processes, while deradicalisation refers to the process of dissuading individuals from extreme ideologies and reintegrating them into society. However, the relationship between deradicalisation efforts and democracy is a complex phenomenon shaped by various sociopolitical and cultural factors.

In most postcolonial societies, the criminal justice system tends to favour punitive measures rather than rehabilitation, whereas mature democracies lean towards rehabilitation over retribution. The latter requires changes in the legal framework, police training and community engagement instead of simply imprisoning or isolating individuals. It also involves providing psychological support, education and facilitating community reintegration.

Extremists typically reject democratic principles and undermine the core tenets of democratic governance. Democracy upholds civil liberties, while extremists aim to limit them. However, repressive measures can undermine democratic values, thereby pushing individuals towards radical ideologies. It is important to remember that deradicalisation is not possible without freedom of thought, equality and human dignity.

The real challenge lies in finding a balance.

Deradicalisation efforts must not only address individual beliefs but also the structural grievances that fuel radicalism. Encouraging civic engagement, nurturing critical thinking, promoting tolerance, and making these part of educational policies can help counter extremist ideologies. Imparting the principles of democracy and the value of human rights should also be part of civic education. The promotion of interfaith and intercultural dialogue can facilitate discussions between people with diverse religious and ethnic backgrounds, resulting in more tolerance, reduced fear and misunderstanding, and denouncement of radical views.

Community-based approaches are considered effective for deradicalisation, as local communities are generally the first to detect signs of radicalisation in their surroundings. Engaging local community leaders in deradicalisation initiatives can create supportive networks that result in peaceful conflict resolution and prevent violence.

In conservative societies, such initiatives can be confronted with controversies. Measuring their effectiveness is difficult as sometimes there are no clear metrics to track. Since follow-up periods are short, there are chances of individuals re-offending. External interference is also a potent trigger for radicalisation: when foreign donors and NGOs work on deradicalisation, such measures can be looked upon with suspicion, thus eroding their credibility. Deradicalisation programmes may also unintentionally promote a particular ideology or politically biased narrative, thus marginalising alternative perspectives. Therefore, ensuring ideological neutrality is essential.

Deradicalisation often requires surveillance and intelligence gathering on individuals, which generates de­­b­ate about privacy and discrimination, parti­cularly when such initiatives are targeted at individuals belonging to a specific ethnicity or religion. Effective deradicalisation efforts need to ensure a balance between security needs and the protection of civil liberties. Some programmes operate in prisons, raising ethical questions about consent. Since participants in such initiatives are monitored, these may violate privacy and result in mistrust.

Pakistan’s National Action Plan was primarily based on kinetic measures; however, the revised NAP has been divided into kinetic and non-kinetic measures, of which nine points relate to the latter.

Achieving a balance between security, rehabilitation, and civil liberties remains a challenge, but when implemented effectively, deradicalisation can help strengthen our democracy by promoting inclusivity, dialogue and peaceful conflict resolution.

The real challenge lies in finding a balance between countering extremism and safeguarding individual freedoms. Achieving such a balance is possible.

The writer is author of Pakistan: In Between Extremism and Peace.

X: @alibabakhel

Published in Dawn, June 14th, 2025