Legal Shackles hindering Pakistan army's counter terrorism efforts

[Safriz]

Section 4 of The Anti Terrorism Act (ATA), 1997 implies that only the federal government can invoke ATA 1997 and deploy armed forces for counter terrorism. If the Provincial government feels the need of deploying armed forces for counter terrorism, they have to get the orders issued via the Federal government.
Once ATA 1997 is implied then the armed forces deployed can act as police and have full police powers and can act autonomously under section 5 of ATA 1997.
Problem is that the legislation is seldom used the correct way in Pakistan . The need is for the provincial governments to be proactive and issue the correct directives via federal government when act of terrorism is imminent .
In 90% of the cases Pakistan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860) or not even that, just a phone call to local army unit.
is invoked by local authorities in case of terrorism, which only gives the armed forces some limited legal rights as helpers of the police.
ISI regularly issues letters to Provincial governments and police about Imminent terrorism threats in their areas. But a preemptive order under ATA 1997 is almost never issued. Its always PPC 1860 after the terrorists have attacked and damage done.
The elected representatives of civilian government should be more responsible and an institution known worldwide for their abilities in counter terrorism should\not be left shackled in legalities and proper sections of the law invoked preemptively.
Today's attack in Peshawar was imminent for more than a month but ATA 1997 was not invoked for the university area for which warnings were issued by ISI and armed forces couldn't take any preemptive actions.
Many steps could have been taken by the armed forces to prevent today's attack from happening if the correct legal clauses were invoked. That still does not relieve or stop the police from their responsibilities and they can continue their work.
Its all about saving the people of Pakistan from Terrorists. Elected representatives have a big role to play by invoking the right clauses of the law at the right time, and they just don't do that.

 

[El Sidd]

Section 4 of The Anti Terrorism Act (ATA), 1997 implies that only the federal government can invoke ATA 1997 and deploy armed forces for counter terrorism. If the Provincial government feels the need of deploying armed forces for counter terrorism, they have to get the orders issued via the Federal government.
Once ATA 1997 is implied then the armed forces deployed can act as police and have full police powers and can act autonomously under section 5 of ATA 1997.
Problem is that the legislation is seldom used the correct way in Pakistan . The need is for the provincial governments to be proactive and issue the correct directives via federal government when act of terrorism is imminent .
In 90% of the cases Pakistan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860) or not even that, just a phone call to local army unit.
is invoked by local authorities in case of terrorism, which only gives the armed forces some limited legal rights as helpers of the police.
ISI regularly issues letters to Provincial governments and police about Imminent terrorism threats in their areas. But a preemptive order under ATA 1997 is almost never issued. Its always PPC 1860 after the terrorists have attacked and damage done.
The elected representatives of civilian government should be more responsible and an institution known worldwide for their abilities in counter terrorism should\not be left shackled in legalities and proper sections of the law invoked preemptively.
Today's attack in Peshawar was imminent for more than a month but ATA 1997 was not invoked for the university area for which warnings were issued by ISI and armed forces couldn't take any preemptive actions.
Many steps could have been taken by the armed forces to prevent today's attack from happening if the correct legal clauses were invoked. That still does not relieve or stop the police from their responsibilities and they can continue their work.
Its all about saving the people of Pakistan from Terrorists. Elected representatives have a big role to play by invoking the right clauses of the law at the right time, and they just don't do that.

Elected representatives are not elected but selected.

As long as that is happening you are likely to find some form of terrorism or fassad

 

[Zibago]

When chairman senate cries the moment we decide to smoke terrorists out what do you think we should do?

 

[Safriz]

Elected representatives are not elected but selected.

As long as that is happening you are likely to find some form of terrorism or fassad

The problem is our media and also people are legally illiterate.
Army gets so much criticism for not being the first on site of a terrorist attack, but they cannot.
Legally they have to be called by police or magistrate unless ATA 97 has been invoked.

 

[El Sidd]

The problem is our medi andalso people are legally illiterate.
Army gets somuch criticism foer not being the first on site of a terrorist attack, but they cannot.
Legally they have to be called by police or magistrate unless ATA 97 has been invoked.

I am more interested in knowing why we the Pakistanis are being targeted?

Just because we chose not to take sides?

What gunah we have done

 

[Indus Pakistan]

No, legal shackles do not and never have held the army back. Please do try to take some facts in when making a statement. And no I am not anti army. My great-grandad, grandad and just about every able bodied male in my family served in the army at some point over the decades. Only I and my generation have moved on to other things. But a strong pro-army sentiment persists within us.

 

[Safriz]

No, legal shackles do not and never have held the army back. Please do try to take some facts in when making a statement.

My dear i know exactly what i am saying as i have taken some time to read Pakistani laws.You do the same and then come back.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

My dear i know exactly what i am saying as i have taken some time to read Pakistani laws.You do the same and then come back.

I don't need to read all the laws. I know in Pakistan law is like a "buffet meal". You pick and chose what you want providing you have the guns or power.

 

[Verve]

I don't need to read all the laws. I know in Pakistan law is like a "buffet meal". You pick and chose what you want providing you have the guns or power.

Your knowledge (the 'I know' bit) is based on false second hand information!

Topic is on giving Army the policing powers. And Army does that only when it has authorisation to do so.

Find an example in last 10 years when Army or Rangers took upon themselves to takeover police role?

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Your knowledge (the 'I know' bit) is based on false second hand information!

Okay boss.

Find an example in last 10 years when Army or Rangers took upon themselves to takeover police role?

Give you clue.

1999-2008

 

[somebozo]

In Karachi police is completely useless and this has given rise to living in Gated communities where as FC has opened up shop as private security contractor. Crimes especially snatching and robbing have sky rocketed despite presence of Rangers.

 

[Verve]

Okay boss.

Give you clue.

1999-2008

Oh gosh .. another one who can't look beyond martial law.

Question: who ordered the current Karachi operation?

And martial law leads to suspension of the Constitution whereas the topic is on giving police powers as per the Constitution. But a TT can't seem to differentiate between the two!

 

[tarrar]

Corrupt & treacherous politicians are biggest obstacle in the way of peace & prosperity in Pakistan.

Terrorism & corruption in Pakistan will never end as long as these bastards are present in Pakistan.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Oh gosh .. another one who can't look beyond martial law.

What is the "gosh" for? You asked a question "Find an example in last 10 years when Army or Rangers took upon themselves to takeover police role?". I answered. Forget about the police, the army was in control of the entire freakin country up till 2008. So there is your answer.

Musharaf - don't forget his two hats. COAS and El Presidente. That placed the entire police and other law enforcement under the military control via COAS. He even attempted to reform the police if you remember. Not that it worked.

 

[Verve]

What is the "gosh" for? You asked a question "Find an example in last 10 years when Army or Rangers took upon themselves to takeover police role?". I answered. Forget about the police, the army was in control of the entire freakin country up till 2008. So there is your answer.

Musharaf - don't forget his two hats. COAS and El Presidente. That placed the entire police and other law enforcement under the military control via COAS. He even attempted to reform the police if you remember. Not that it worked.

Grow a brain fool! Topic is about a democratic government giving powers to army that they can as per ATA. And you are harping on martial law times! Apple and orange but you can't seem to differentiate whatsoever!!