Discussions on terrorism

WHILE visiting the British parliament a few years ago, I was struck by the tradition —observed by prime ministers — of paying homage and expressing gratitude at the start of the weekly question time session to British armed forces personnel who had been killed or injured in action. It was the time of the Afghan war and British troops were stationed in Afghanistan. I thought it was a great tradition that reminded everyone of the sacrifices made by the soldiers and sent a powerful message to the troops that their countrymen had the highest regard for them and their sacrifices. Although Pakistan follows the British parliamentary system, almost all Pakistani prime ministers have avoided personally answering questions in parliament. As prime minister, Yousuf Raza Gilani used to answer many supplementary questions himself when he was in the House — but that was not a part of the set parliamentary procedure. Imran Khan had promised to follow this British tradition when he was prime minister and personally answer questions. However, he neither tried to change the parliamentary rules nor did he ever answer any questions in parliament. Both Houses and the provincial assemblies observe question hour but there is no parliamentary tradition of routinely acknowledging the sacrifices of the country’s shuhda and ghazis. The president, prime minister, ministers and senior civil and military officers do issue statements, and legislatures occasionally pass resolutions honouring those fighting a bloody war against terrorism; but the possibility of a weekly tribute did cross my mind. After all, hardly a day passes without hearing of security personnel — in the armed forces, paramilitaries, police and other security bodies — who have lost their lives in the line of duty. We need committees that are more active in debating national security. Almost all sources of information show that the number of violent terrorist incidents, casualties and fatalities in Pakistan have reached their