GLOBALLY, counterterrorism (CT) is a policing function, focused on prevention, investigation and law enforcement. In Pakistan, terrorism has sectarian, ethnic and cross-border dimensions. Hence, the police cannot handle it alone.

In high-threat environments, CT extends beyond regular policing and involves CT departments (CTDs), the military, intelligence agencies and federal institutions. At independence, Pakistan inherited a policing system based on the Irish constabulary model, operated through the Police Act of 1861. Designed to suppress dissent rather than serve communities, it trained police as a force to maintain state authority rather than a service for citizens.

The Police Act 1861 made no reference to terrorism. The Police Order 2002, a post-9/11 law, also overlooked the police role in CT. Only Article 160 mentioned terrorism research as a function of the Police Mana­gement Board. Sections 4(1-e) and 13(3-I) of the KP Police Act, 2017, later defined countering militancy and terrorism as police duties, and the need for a CTD.

The police role was notable during the Afghan war. Sectarian and ethnic violence further shaped it. In the post-9/11 era, CTDs were created to prevent terrorism, gather intelligence, investigate and prosecute terror cases. For coordination, Nacta was set up. The Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, provided the framework, while forensic labs and safe cities projects were intr­­oduced.

With their local knowledge, community interface and operational reach, police are central in preventing and responding to terrorism. They disrupt plots through surveillance, investigation, arrests, evidence-gathering, monitoring radical groups and enforcing anti-terrorism laws. They also work with communities to identify radicalisation. CTD standardisation is a part of NAP, but the provinces adopted their own models. Point 8 of NAP calls for a dedicated CT force, while point 3 of the revised NAP and Internal Security Policy 2022-2026 stresses the capacity-building of CTDs.

Terrorism has transformed policing.

In Sri Lanka’s 26-year war against the LTTE, police worked alongside the military. The Criminal Investigation Depar­tment and Terrorism Investigation Division collected intelligence and conducted surveillance. The Prevention of Terrorism Act empowered police to arrest and detain suspects without a warrant, while police remained actively engaged with the community and maintained the special task force’s presence.

In India, the police role is multifaceted. The National Investigation Agency is central. As first responders, police engage in preventive and reactive efforts. Special branches collect local information. Thro­u­gh outreach, police engage youth and clerics, while some states have introduced reintegration programmes for radicalised individuals.

Compared to sophisticated terror networks, however, the police are under-equ­ipped. Outdated training hampers CTDs, with an emphasis on physical drills and weapons handling. Training in militant tactics, forensics, cybercrime, terrorism finan­cing and intelligence analysis remains weak.

Conviction rates in terrorism cases typically remain at 10–15 per cent, with many suspects acquitted. Weak prosecution and poor coordination within the criminal justice system favour the accused. Heavy reliance on oral testimony, rather than evidence, further hinders prosecution. The lack of witness protection in militancy-infested areas has serious consequences. Strengthening investigation and ensuring fair, timely trials are vital.

Terrorism has also transformed policing, creating a more militarised appro­ach that incr­eases fear and distances police from communities. The challe­nge is how police can ope­rate as both law enforcers and CT agencies with a less militarised outlook. Globally, greater police involvement in CT has weakened police-public relations. Expanded profiling and surveillance through CCTV, internet and telephony have added to the distance. Community policing suffers when CT shifts the focus to intelligence and risk management, often disproportionately targeting certain groups. This weakens trust, fuels alienation and makes cooperation harder to sustain.

Pakistan must consider a unified CT command, integrated intelligence-police databases, modernisation, better training, enhanced coordination, stronger community policing, standardised CTDs, joint trainings with federal agencies and the use of AI and big data for early warnings.

The real challenge is how to achieve these ideals in the post-18th Amendment era. Countering terrorism without understanding its root causes may result in a waste of resources and time. Therefore, it is essential to review the CT efforts afresh.

The writer is the author of Pakistan: In Between Extremism and Peace. The article is based on a talk at a workshop on ‘Policing and its Role in CT’ at the IR Department, NDU, Islamabad.

X: @alibabakhel

Published in Dawn, August 30th, 2025