Countering Insurgency and Terrorism in Pakistan: Challenges and

Recommendations

Muhammad Imran and Rohaida Nordin

Faculty of Law, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia

Keywords: Causes, Counter terrorism, Evolution, Insurgency, Pakistan.

Abstract: Since independence, terrorism has remained a constant existential threat for Pakistan. Political discord,

sectarian violence and a deteriorating law and order situation have forced its various governments to take

effective legal measures to cope these problems. However, all these laws remain unproductive due to a weak

criminal justice system. Therefore, some special legal procedures are presented to deal with specific criminal

offences outside the Pakistan's regular criminal justice system as it has been unable to provide justice speedily.

During the 1990’s extreme sectarian violence and a deteriorating peace situation in the country forced the

government of the time to enact more stringent laws for the apprehension and speedy trial of suspected

terrorists. This paper reviews the evolution of Counter Terrorism laws in Pakistan prior to 9/11. It also

identifies the reasons for the failure in countering insurgency and terrorism in Pakistan. This paper

demonstrates that poverty, external involvement, religious intolerance, religious madrassas, the Soviet and

U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Democratic instability are the root causes of breeding terrorism and

insurgency in Pakistan. This paper concludes with suggestions to help eliminate the factors motivating

terrorist activities and enhance the counter terrorism approach in Pakistan.

1 INTRODUCTION

Terrorism is a serious phenomenon of present times

and has spread worldwide. Terrorism poses a serious

threat to Pakistan in destabilising it socially,

economically and politically (Ali, 2010). It poses a

threat not only to security but also to the basic rights

to life and freedom of its civilians assured under the

Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan

1973. Terrorism has become a major problem for its

government and a nightmare for its civilians

(Wadhwani, 2011).

Laws are “dynamic” in nature and they change

with the passage of time to reflect the needs of

society. Generally, well-organised laws form an

organised society. Although various governments

during their tenure passed several Counter Terrorism

laws, the vital factor of implementation always

remained neglected (Perwaiz, 2016). Pakistan is in

war-like situation against terrorists nowadays.

Pakistan has lost 67,399 people in the war on terror”

(Sabri, 2017). Economic losses are huge, which is

highlighted in the report of the State Bank of

Pakistan, stating that "extremist violence has cost the

country $118.3bn in direct and indirect losses from

2002 to 2016." According to this report “both

economic growth and social sector development have

been severely hampered by terrorism-related

incidents” (Sabri, 2017). A review of the available

literature shows that several causes contribute to the

breeding of terrorism in Pakistan, including socio-

economic inequalities, religious intolerance, foreign

involvement and international conspiracy. These

factors result in the failure of Counter Terrorism and

Counter Insurgency measures in Pakistan (Naz, et al.,

2013).

2 LEGAL MEASURES TO

COUNTER INSURGENCY AND

TERRORISM IN PAKISTAN

Pakistan has a long history of anti-terrorism laws as

its various governments have enacted several laws, to

meet the needs of the time, to combat insurgency and

terrorism. The Public and Representative Offices

Disqualification Act 1949 allowed for the trial of

public officials and for disqualification from holding

public office for up to 15 years. The Security of

Imran, M. and Nordin, R.

Countering Insurgency and Terrorism in Pakistan: Challenges and Recommendations.

DOI: 10.5220/0010052600950102

In Proceedings of the International Law Conference (iN-LAC 2018) - Law, Technology and the Imperative of Change in the 21st Century, pages 95-102

ISBN: 978-989-758-482-4

Pakistan Act, 1952 and the Defence of Pakistan

Ordinance, 1955 were frequently used for political

objectives. Public Offices (Disqualification) Order,

1959 and Electoral Bodies (Disqualification) Order,

1959 were passed during Gen. Ayub Khan’s rule to

control political discord. The role of judiciary was by-

passed and political dissent was controlled by these

orders (Iqbal, 2006). The Suppression of Terrorist

Activities (Special Courts) Ordinance (XVIII), 1974

was presented by the Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s

government to specifically cope with terrorism or

terrorist activities. It was introduced in response to

“nationalist” movements in the NWFP (now Khyber

Pakhtoon Khawa) and Baluchistan. This law

established special courts for the speedy trial of

suspected terrorists. Later, after approval from

Parliament it became ‘The Suppression of Terrorist

Activities (Special Court) Act of 1975’. But this law

went against the basic concept of fair trial in several

ways especially in section 8 which pre-assumed the

guilt of the accused.

Various governments during their tenure

attempted to introduce new laws for the apprehension

and speedy trial of suspected terrorists. The Special

Courts for Speedy Trial Act XV, 1987, The Terrorist

Affected Areas (Special Courts) Ordinance, 1990 and

The Terrorist Affected Areas (Special Courts) Act,

1992 were enacted to curb heinous crimes considered

by the federal government to be terrifying, inhuman,

unethical, leading to public outrage, and creating fear

and anxiety. But various socio-political changes in

Pakistan made these laws ineffective.

Therefore, the government introduced The Anti-

Terrorism Act in 1997 in order to combat terrorism,

sectarian violence and to ensure speedy trial of

heinous crimes. To inhibit terrorist activities this Act

allowed the provincial governments to call on the

military and civilian armed forces by requesting from

the federal government. The Act also launched

Special Anti-Terrorist Courts for the speedy trial of

the heinous offenses. Besides this, The Anti-Terrorist

Act also made it mandatory to conduct the trial of the

crimes within 7 days after the submission of the case

to the court and in no more than 2 sequential

adjournments. The courts also had specific authority

to try the criminal in absentia while any appeals could

only be made in Special Anti-Terrorism Appellate

Tribunals and their judgments would be considered

final and could not be challenged in any other court

(ATA, 1997).

The Supreme Court of Pakistan made some

alterations to The Anti- Terrorism Act in the

renowned ‘Mehram Ali versus Federation of

Pakistan’ case. The Supreme Court of Pakistan

announced that Anti-Terrorism Courts would be

subject to follow similar procedural rules as regular

courts, as well as rules of evidence. Additionally, the

Supreme Court also sustained the right of appeal

against the judgments of the Anti-Terrorism courts to

the ordinary courts. Therefore, as a result of the

decision of The Supreme Court, the government had

to make amendments in the Anti-Terrorist Act and

issued The Anti -Terrorism Amendment Ordinance

1998, which assimilated the changes ordered by the

Supreme Court in the Mehram Ali versus Federation

of Pakistan case. Though the Anti-Terrorism

Amendment Ordinance 1998 dispersed the Special

Appellate Tribunals, it kept the Special Anti-Terrorist

Courts functional.

During this time, the deteriorating law and order

situation in Sindh, especially in Karachi and the

killing of Hakim Muhammad Saeed, a former

governor of Sindh in October 1998, forced the

government to make more changes to the Anti -

Terrorism laws. The Government declared a state of

emergency in Sindh, and imposed Governor’s rule

inviting the Military to establish law and order in the

province. To give it legal power, the government

launched the Pakistan Armed Forces (Acting in Aid

of Civil Power) Ordinance, 1998. This ordinance was

restricted to Sindh province and it established

Military Courts which also had authority to trial

civilians. This Ordinance also described a new crime

called Civil Commotion, which can be punishable for

up to 7 years of imprisonment or a fine, or both. Civil

commotion included creation of in-house

disturbances by violating the law, initiating or

continuing prohibited strikes, lock-outs, vehicle theft,

destruction of State or Public property, firing

weapons to create fear, extortion, acts of criminal

trespass, graffiti wall-chalking intended to create

threat, and stimulating the commission of a crime

punishable under the Pakistan Penal Code. The

Supreme Court of Pakistan in its remarkable decision

in the case of Liaquat Hussain vs. Federation of

Pakistan on February 1999 rejected the Ordinance by

declaring the Pakistan Armed Forces Ordinance 1998

unconstitutional. The Supreme Court also ruled that

no civilians could be tried in Military Courts. Though,

the government cancelled the Ordinance on April 27,

1999 it added civil commotion as a crime in the Anti-

Terrorism Act through a new Ordinance in August

1999. Because of this Ordinance, Anti-terrorist

Courts were established throughout the whole

country. Later, Nawaz Sharif’s government was

dissolved by General Pervez Musharraf on Oct. 12,

1999. General Pervez Musharraf made two

amendments to the Anti-Terrorism Ordinance 1999.

iN-LAC 2018 - International Law Conference 2018

The first amendment extended the jurisdiction of

courts in Sections 109, 120, 120 B, 121, 122, 123,

365, 402 and 402 B. Under the second amendment

two special courts were formed in Lahore High Court

and Karachi High Court which could also work as

Appellate Tribunals for the decisions of Anti-

Terrorist Courts. Although, the Anti-Terrorist Courts

were working as ordinary courts under Gen. Pervez

Musharraf’s government, the worsening law and

order situation of the country forced him to make

more amendments to the Anti-Terrorism system.

General Pervez Musharraf introduced the Anti-

Terrorism Amendment Ordinance on August 15,

2001 which allowed the government to ban and freeze

the assets of any militant or sectarian organisation

found to be involved in terroristic activities.

A Summary of Legal Measures Taken to Counter

Insurgency and Terrorism in Pakistan.

Sr.

No.

Legislation / Act

Name

Objectives / Purpose

The Public and

Representative

Offices

Disqualification

Act, 1949

“The first constituent

assembly passed the

controversial Public

and Representative

Office

(Disqualification)

Act (PRODA), 1949,

that provided for trial

of public office

holders and

disqualification from

holding public office

for up to 15 years.”

The Security of

Pakistan Act,

1952

“For special

measures to deal with

persons acting in a

manner prejudicial to

the defense, external

affairs and security of

Pakistan”

The Defense of

Pakistan

Ordinance, 1955

The Security of

Pakistan Act, 1952 &

The Defense of

Pakistan Ordinance,

1955. “These laws

were used by the

government of the

day to suppress civil

liberties such as

freedom of speech.”

Public Offices

(Disqualification)

Order, 1959

“Patterned after the

often misused

PRODA.”

Electoral Bodies

(Disqualification)

Order, 1959

“During General

Ayub Khan’s military

rule Public Offices

(Disqualification)

Order, 1959 and

Electoral Bodies

(Disqualification)

Order, 1959 were

enacted to control

political dissent. By

and large these laws

had wide ranging

applications, which

were also used by the

government of the

day for countering

terrorism.”

Suppression of

Terrorist

Activities

(Special Courts)

Ordinance

(XVIII), 1974

The first law that

specifically dealt

with “terrorism” or

“terrorist acts” This

law, for the first time,

established a parallel

judicial system with

exclusive jurisdiction

for “speedy trials” of

terrorists.

the Suppression

of Terrorist

Activities

(Special Court)

Act, 1975

A few months later

the Parliament

approved the

Suppression of

Terrorist Activities

(Special Courts)

Ordinance (XVIII),

1974 and it became

the Suppression of

Terrorist Activities

(Special Court) Act

of 1975.

The Special

Courts for

Speedy Trial Act

XV, 1987

“For the

establishment of

special courts for

speedy trial”

Terrorist

Affected Areas

(Special Courts)

Ordinance, 1990

“To provide for the

speedy trial of certain

offences in terrorist

affected areas.”

Terrorist

Affected Areas

(Special Courts)

Act, 1992

“To provide for the

speedy trial of certain

offences in terrorist

affected areas.”

Anti-Terrorism

Act, 1997

“To provide for the

prevention of

terrorism, sectarian

Countering Insurgency and Terrorism in Pakistan: Challenges and Recommendations

violence and for

speedy trial of

heinous offences and

for matters connected

therewith and

incidental thereto:”

Anti -Terrorism

(Amendment)

Ordinance, 1998

“Dispersed the

Special Appellate

Tribunals, but kept

Special Anti-

Terrorist Courts

functional.”

Pakistan Armed

Forces (Acting in

Aid of Civil

Power)

Ordinance, 1998

“Established Military

Courts in the

province that can try

civilians also. This

Ordinance also

described a new

crime called as Civil

Commotion, which

can be punishable for

up to 7 years of

imprisonment.”

Anti-Terrorism

Ordinance, 1999

“First amendment

extended the

jurisdiction of courts.

Second amendment

two special courts

were formed in

Lahore High Court

and Karachi High

Court and they could

also work as

Appellate Tribunals

for the decisions of

Anti-Terrorist

Courts.”

Anti-Terrorism

(Amendment)

Ordinance

XXXIX Of 2001

“To ban any militant

or sectarian

organization and also

freeze their assets if

found involved in

terrorism or terrorist

activities in the

State.”

3 THE PROBLEMS OF

PAKISTAN’S CRIMINAL

JUSTICE SYSTEM IN

COUNTERING INSURGENCY

AND TERRORISM

Lack of effective law enforcement is the major cause

of breeding terrorism. It is considered as society's

official struggle to attain compliance with the rules

and regulations of society. Unfortunately, the law

enforcement structure in Pakistan is very

disappointing and it is ineffective in enforcing the

laws of the country (Yusuf, 2014). According to the

World Justice Project’s 2016, the rule of law index

shows Pakistan placed 106 out of 113 countries for

regulating law enforcement. It also highlights that the

Pakistan criminal justice system is slow and

unproductive and that violation of laws is widespread

in the country (Shehzad, 2017). The United States

Institute of Peace shows that Pakistan’s law

enforcement agencies are constantly failing in

fighting crime, sustaining the rule of law, providing

security to citizens and combating increased violence

and terrorism. Ineffective and unsuccessful law

enforcement is considered as heaven for terrorist

activities (Abbas, 2011). Pakistan's counter-terrorism

legislation is full of flaws as indicated by Pakistan's

Centre for Research and Security Studies (Bokhari,

2013). The first major flaw is that a large number of

detained suspected terrorists are released without

trial, because of the expiration of the allowed

detention period, without any action. Other flaws

include a lack of a proper system for collection and

safe storage of evidence, a weak policing system,

absence of prisons having high security for suspected

militants, and a lack of a monitoring mechanism of

mosques and religious madrasas. There are several

weaknesses in the Anti-Terrorism Act which creates

hurdles in eradicating terrorism from the country

(Haider et al., 2015).

One of the reasons for the failure of Counter

Terrorism measures in Pakistan is its weak policing

system. The police rules (1934) and the police

structure inherited from the British has not been

amended to the modern-day needs. With the

advancement in technology the problems of the 21st

century are quite different from that of the 19th

century. Therefore, the Pakistan police system should

be modernised and changed to an effective legal and

institutional structure based on transparency and

accountability (Hassan, 2011). An efficient and

effective police structure is vital for countering

insurgency and terrorism in Pakistan. The other

iN-LAC 2018 - International Law Conference 2018

reasons for the failure of Pakistan's criminal justice

system includes political influence, inadequate

training, corruption, insufficient equipment, lack of

modern forensic services, legislative loopholes and

weaknesses in the judicial department, all of which

assists terrorist groups to escape punishment. The

courts have to fulfil all the legal procedures and

cannot convict accused persons without proper

evidence (Abbas, 2011).

Since independence, no serious effort is made to

reform Pakistan's justice system which was inherited

from the British which was put in place to achieve

their aims in Indian subcontinent in colonial times.

For the development of a civilised society, a smooth

functioning justice system is essential. Pakistan has

never had an independent prosecution department

which is crucial for an effective criminal justice

system. In Pakistan there is no concept of independent

prosecution which is often controlled by the executive

and also used against political rivals. Only those

prosecutors who harbour an interest in the ruling

party are chosen (Arshad, 2017).

Lawyers also play a part in the failure of

Pakistan's criminal justice system as many are trying

to utilise the system for their own benefits. However,

lawyers can play an important part in providing

justice and making a strong criminal justice system.

Unfortunately, Pakistan's Bar Council has failed to

manage and properly regulate the legal community.

As a result, people are losing faith in the justice

system (Niazi, 2015).

Inadequate training of the investigation officers

has also contributed to the failure of the criminal

justice system of Pakistan, as this slows down the

conviction rate. Most of the investigation officers do

not have a legal education which is beneficial to

conduct a thorough investigation (Abbas, 2016).

There is no witness protection mechanism in

Pakistan’s criminal justice system. As a result, those

who provide evidence against high profile criminals

and terrorists receive no protection. In various cases

police officers investigating the terrorists and also

witnesses are killed. For example, in Malik Ishaq’s

case, which resulted in 70 killings, but no-one was

ever convicted (Kharal, 2011). At a later date, he was

killed along with 13 terrorists in a “shootout” as he

reportedly attempted to escape police custody (Qarni,

2015).

Judges are facing similar security threats. Several

terrorism-related cases are pending in lower courts

due to security threats. It was the failure of criminal

justice system of Pakistan that the alleged terrorists

involved in the Marriott Hotel Islamabad bombings

were released by the courts due to the lack of evidence

(Gunaratna, 2008).

4 FACTORS BREEDING

TERRORISM IN PAKISTAN

There are several factors which contribute to the

initiation and support of terrorism in Pakistan which

include injustice, poverty, unemployment, religious

intolerance, an un-reformed education system, the

unresolved Kashmir issue, separatist movements,

external hands involvement, and Soviet and US

invasions of Afghanistan (Haider at el, 2015).

The increasing number of terrorism in Pakistan

caused by various factors which are as follows;

Injustice is the top cause of breeding terrorism. If the

legitimate complaints of the people are not resolved,

then they may choose violent acts. Delays in the

justice system are another reason for victims to be

attracted to terrorist groups (Irshad, 2011). The

unresolved Kashmir issue and the discriminating

behaviour of the West in solving this issue are

creating aggressiveness and violence among

Pakistan’s youth. Ultimately, they join terrorist

organisations and are brain washed for the

organisation’s benefit (Jamal, 2012).

Social inequalities and inadequate economic

conditions are major causes of breeding terrorism in

Pakistan (Jamal, 2012). In Pakistan 60% of its

population is living below the poverty line, being

incapable of feeding and educating their children.

Therefore, they send their children to religious

madrassas to fulfil their children’s basic needs.

Religious madrassas are the epicentres of militancy in

Pakistan. The youth taught through these religious

Madrassas are educated with extremist ideas; they do

not tolerate other religions and “even other sects of

their own religion.” Religious intolerance “adds fuel

to the fire of terrorism” and it is a destructive

influence on social harmony, political consistency

and economic progress (Irshad, 2011).

Sectarian violence also has a destabilising effect

on Pakistan, at its peak during Gen. Zia ul Haq’s

military rule. The Muttahida Quami Movement

(MQM) created by Gen. Zia ul Haq to weaken the

People's Party has a strong terrorist arm and was

responsible for destroying Karachi’s peace and

prosperity. Its members were involved in extortion

and targeted killings. It is also ran a campaign in Urdu

speaking provinces consisting of Karachi and

Hyderabad. But some other parties did not like the

invasion of the “Urdu speaking community, Punjabis,

Countering Insurgency and Terrorism in Pakistan: Challenges and Recommendations

Pathans, Kashmiris and Baluchis in Sindh wanted an

independent country named Sindhu Desh (Khushi,

2016).” Currently, several parties including MQM,

Awami National Party, and Pakistan People’s Party,

Jamaat e Islami and several other Sindhi Nationalist

parties are fighting to have control over Karachi.

Baluchis have created different terrorist groups for

the separation of Baluchistan from Pakistan to form

“Greater Baluchistan”. India is reportedly involved in

supporting separatist movements of Baluchistan.

Baluchi separatists are taking revenge by killing

Punjabis for the persecution of Baluchis by the

Pakistan Army in which Punjabis dominate (Khushi,

2016).

After the Soviet invasion in Afghanistan, religious

Madrassas took on a new dimension as they were

being used as training centres for so-called Jihadis.

Many so-called Mujahedeen were trained and sent to

Afghanistan to fight against Soviet forces. After the

removal of Soviet Union from Afghanistan, a large

number of the Mujahedeen returning to Pakistan

indulged in terrorist activities (Wadhwani, 2011).

The Soviet war in Afghanistan was responsible

for spreading terrorism and intolerance in Pakistan.

The aftermath of the Soviet removal from

Afghanistan transferred violence, extremism and

weaponization into Pakistan's society resulting in

sectarian and interfaith violence (FazlI, 2012). In last

two decades over 4,000 people have been killed in

sectarian violence. External hands involvement in

Pakistan is also one of the root causes of spreading

terrorism in Pakistan as it is believed that foreign

intelligence agencies are sponsoring and training

terrorists in Anti- Pakistan activities. The US, Indian

and Israeli agencies are reportedly involved in

terrorist attacks taking place in Pakistan (Ahmed,

2016).

Democratic instability caused by the military

rules of General Ayub Khan, General Yahiya Khan

and Gen. Zia ul Haq and General Pervez Musharraf

resulted in political instability, bad governance and

socio-economic collapse. This delicate situation

along with the deteriorating law and order situation

provided a fertile breeding ground for terrorism (Naz,

et al., 2013).

The current education system in Pakistan is a

colonial inheritance and has not been fully

modernised to meet the ideological, scientific and

advanced needs of the modern-day State. It is a

neglected sector as Pakistan spends only 2.6 % of its

GDP on education. It also does not adopt the

principles of Islam to oppress the inter faith divisions

(Bajoria, 2009).

After the incident of 9/11, religious extremism has

developed into new forms. The US invasion in

Afghanistan and use of combat drones in Pakistan's

tribal areas has served to fuel religious extremism,

leading to violent reactions. The US’s drone strikes

have increased anti-Americanism in Pakistan as

thousands of innocent civilians have been killed or

injured in these strikes. Terrorists are using this

collateral damage for their benefit because families of

the people killed in drone strikes become an ideal

nursery for suicide bombers. The purpose of suicide

attacks is to create public outrage and also to set the

public against the government and military as they

fight a “war on terror” (Ahmed, 2016). The chart

below shows that ‘War on Terror’ has increased

terrorism in Pakistan.

The collapse of the state infrastructure in

Afghanistan generated a vacuum which was rapidly

filled by groups who took this battle upon themselves

to continue to fight a lost battle. Some of them

invaded into Pakistan's tribal areas, and clearing the

tribal areas of foreign fighters by Pakistani armed

forces has transformed Pakistan into a battle ground

(Javaid, 2015).

Due to this battle Pakistan has lost thousands of

its civilians, shown in table below.

Table 1: Casualties in Pakistan since 2003 to 2017. Data till

12 November 2017.

Years

Civilians

Security

Force

Personnel

Terrorists /

Insurgents

Total

2003

140

189

2004

435

184

244

863

2005

430

137

648

2006

608

325

538

1471

2007

1522

597

1479

3598

2008

2155

654

3906

6715

2009

2324

991

8389

11704

2010

1796

469

5170

7435

2011

2738

765

2800

6303

2012

3007

732

2472

6211

2013

3001

676

1702

5379

2014

1781

533

3182

5496

2015

940

339

2403

3682

2016

612

293

898

1803

2017

460

189

458

1107

Total*

21949

6852

33803

62604

Source: http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/pakistan/

database/casualties.htm

iN-LAC 2018 - International Law Conference 2018

100

5 RECOMMENDATIONS

a. Pakistan must reform its criminal justice system

to modern-day needs and make arrangements to

implement the counter terrorism laws effectively.

b. Madrassas should be reformed, and heads of those

madrassas should be engaged to provide a long-

term solution to the on-going problems resulting

from religious intolerance.

c. Pakistan's education system must be reformed

according to the present needs. Pakistan's

government should emphasise and promote

technical education to help decrease

unemployment in the country.

d. Pakistan's government, general public and

security agencies must work together with strong

coordination in fighting terrorism.

e. The United States must play its part in resolving

the Kashmir issue to cope with the menace of

terrorism in the region.

f. The performance of the government must be

improved by removing corruption which has

lowered its integrity and credibility among the

general public. Government and opposition

parties must unite against International pressure

and collaborate with each other in order to make

an effective Counter Terrorism strategy.

g. Pakistan must take measures to strengthen its

border with Afghanistan in order to end terrorists’

invasion and foreign involvement.

h. Persons promoting religious intolerance, sectarian

violence and extremism must be strictly punished.

To promote inter-sect harmony; reform programs

must be introduced through education, media and

extra-curricular activities.

6 CONCLUSIONS

Pakistan's criminal justice system needs urgent

procedural reforms as there are several weaknesses in

the rules of evidence and it requires a strong will to

implement the laws. Cases not completed within time

end in no penalty imposed on accused parties, and in

case of adjournment of the trial due to absence of

appreciable evidence as is being used internationally

for criminal trials. The creation of the military courts

is not a long-term solution to problems of the criminal

justice system of Pakistan. The solution to Pakistan's

problems lies in reforming its criminal justice system.

An independent prosecution department should be

formed which should be free from government

involvement in its functions. It is essential for the rule

of law and the supremacy of the Constitution of

Pakistan that its Supreme Court should take

satisfactory measures in order to “protect the

mishandling of Justice”. The Pakistan government

should take measures to replace the “military

approach” with a counter terrorism strategy

controlled by civilian law enforcement agencies. It

must implement the Anti-Terrorism Act both in letter

and spirit, it is an abomination to possess laws and not

implement them. It is essential to reform the Penal

Code, Criminal Procedure Code and Evidence to

meet current needs. The government should make it a

priority identify and eliminate the factors contributing

to spread terrorism in Pakistan.

REFERENCES

Abbas, H., 2011. Reforming Pakistan‘s Police and Law

Enforcement Infrastructure. US Institute of Peace,

Washington, DC.

Abbas, H., 2016. Internal security issues in Pakistan:

Prospects of police and law enforcement reform.

Pakistan at the crossroads: Domestic dynamics and

external pressures, 121-135.

Ahmed, Z. S., 2016. Regionalism and regional security in

South Asia: the role of SAARC. Routledge.

Ali, A., 2010. Economic cost of terrorism: A case study of

Pakistan. Strategic Studies.

Anon, ‘Pakistan ranks third on Global Terrorism Index’,

Dawn, 18 November 2014.

Arshad, S. J. ‘Criminal Justice System in Pakistan: A

Critical Analysis’, Courting the law, 15 February 2017.

Bajoria, J., 2009. Pakistan’s education system and links to

extremism. Council on Foreign Relations, New York,

October, 7.

Bokhari, S. W., 2013. Pakistan's Challenges in Anti-terror

Legislation. Center for Research and Security Studies.

FazlI, S., 2012. Sectarianism and conflict: The view from

Pakistan. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for

International Studies.

Gunaratna, R., 2008. The Islamabad Marriott in Flames:

The Attack on the World's Most Protected Hotel.

Journal of Policing, Intelligence and Counter

Terrorism, 3(2), PP 99-116.

Haider, S., de Pablos Heredero, C., Ahmed, M., &

Dustgeer, S., 2015. Identifying Causes of Terrorism in

Pakistan. Dialogue (Pakistan), 10(3).

Hassan, A., 2011. Reforming Pakistan’s Police and Law

Enforcement Infrastructure. Technical report,

Retrieved from http://www. usip.

org/sites/default/files/SR266-Reforming_Pakistan%

E2% 80%

98s_Police_and_Law_Enforcement_Infrastructure.

pdf.

Iqbal, J., 2006. The Role of the judiciary as a catalyst of

Change. In International judicial conference,

Islamabad.

Countering Insurgency and Terrorism in Pakistan: Challenges and Recommendations

101

Irshad, M., 2011. Terrorism in Pakistan: Causes &

Remedies. Dialogue (Pakistan), 6(3).

Jamal, s. ‘Terrorism in Pakistan’, CSSForum, 16 November

2012.

Javaid, U., 2015. Operation Zarb-e-Azb: A Successful

Initiative to Curtail Terrorism. South Asian Studies,

30(2), 43.

Kharal, A. ‘Court releases terror kingpin, alleged killer of

70’, The Express Tribune, 15 July 2011.

Khushi, Y. ‘Terrorism in Pakistan Causes and Effects’,

academia, 2016.

Naz, A., Hussain, M., Khan, W., Alam, A., Daraz, U., &

Mughal, I., 2013. Militancy: A Myth or Reality an

Exploratory Study of the Socio-economic and

Religious Forces Behind Militancy in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Bangladesh e-Journal of

Sociology, 10(2).

Niazi, J. ‘Our Broken Criminal Justice system’,

ARYNEWS, 20 January 2015.

Perwaiz, S. B. ‘Pakistan’s anti-terror laws: fixed and

revamped many times, but never applied practically’,

The News, 25 July 2016.

Qarni, O. ‘Malik Ishaq: The life and death of a terror

kingpin’, The Express Tribune, 29 July 2015.

Sabri, F. ‘67,399 people killed in terror attacks during past

15 years’, Pakistan today, 20 May 2017.

Shehzad, R. ‘Global survey: Pakistan ranks 106th in world

for justice system’, The Express Tribune, 26 August

2017.

Sumner, R. ‘Charts prove that the west's 'war on terror' has

only created more terrorism’, Sott, 28 November 2015.

Wadhwani, R. ‘Terrorism in Pakistan: Its Causes, Impacts

and Remedies’, 28 September 2011.

Yusuf, M. (Ed.)., 2014. Pakistan's Counterterrorism

challenge. Georgetown University Press.

iN-LAC 2018 - International Law Conference 2018

102