KHYBER: Members of the three Dispute Resolution Councils (DRCs) in Khyber district have been accused of malpractice, eroding the public’s trust in the ‘judicious’ functioning of these bodies.
The DRCs in the three tehsils of Khyber were constituted under the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Alternate Dispute Resolution Act, with the local police overseeing their affairs and selecting ‘men of integrity’ as members with sufficient knowledge of tribal customs and traditions.
People in Landi Kotal and Bara, who had approached the DRCs for speedy, fair and free resolution of their issues, however, alleged that their members demanded cash security deposits, locally referred to as Machalga, from rival parties before resolving any dispute.
Requesting anonymity, they said that there were occasions when a certain amount fixed by the head of the DRC was deposited with him and then the police official concerned “walked off” with the said amount after his transfer from the post, while leaving both the rival parties in a quandary over whom they would approach for the recovery of the security amount.
Accuse police of interfering in councils’ affairs
They said that when they approached the new DRC head for the recovery of their money, he would advise them to go after the previous one.
Questions were also raised about who had empowered the DRC heads to demand money from the applicants, as the terms of reference shared with residents clearly stated that the work of the DRC would be voluntary and free from influence and use of money.
Zar Ahmad Shah, a tribal elder in Landi Kotal, told Dawn that they were expecting the DRCs to be different from the official jirgas in the former Fata, which reportedly lacked impartiality and forced the rival groups to pay them bribes in lieu of their ‘services’.
He said that DRC members were under oath to discharge their responsibilities with honesty and fairness by providing speedy and free justice to the affected parties or groups.
“I believe that the majority of the DRC members are inexperienced and are more interested in making their personal fortunes than resolving disputes and conflicts,” he said and added that the very purpose behind the establishment of these councils was failing.
Gul Zarin, a resident of Bara, alleged that SHOs had hijacked DRCs as they deputed their own “touts” from among the police station staff to lure people to ‘bring’ their cases to the SHO instead of approaching DRC members.
He said that the SHOs had engaged some local elders “having low repute” to tackle cases outside the courts and DRCs while demanding money for their “services”.
He said that the rate of complaints or requests to the Bara DRC declined considerably due to increasing interference of the police officials and “corrupt practices” of the council members.
Shah Khalid, former Landi Kotal tehsil chairman, demanded a system of ‘checks and balances’ over the working of DRCs to ensure transparency in their functions and restore people’s confidence in them.
Officials at the DPO office in Jamrud said they did not receive any complaint against DRCs for committing any wrong doing.
They said that prompt action would be taken if a DRC member was found committing malpractice.
Published in Dawn, October 25th, 2026
