ISLAMABAD: Pakistan is a unique country whose intelligence agencies are not only operating without any established oversight mechanism but also have no system of working coordination among them, which is direly required today to check terrorism.
Although, the proposed setting up of the Joint Intelligence Directorate under Nacta (National Counter Terrorism Authority) by the government may pave way for the much-needed coordination to check terrorism, there is nothing under consideration to keep the agencies under check through a formal oversight mechanism.
Almost 27 years back, a high-level commission called the Air Chief Marshal Zulfiqar Ali Khan Commission was set up by the then government of Benazir Bhutto to evolve a system for the agencies’ oversight but none of the governments could get the recommendations of the body implemented.
In the absence of the oversight system, these agencies in the past have been involved in politics, in the making and breaking of governments and political parties. This situation also led to non-existence of any coordination system among them. Instead, these agencies have been found involved in rivalries.
The Air Chief Marshal Zulfiqar Ali Khan Commission had recommended a two-tier oversight mechanism for the spy agencies, including the ISI and the IB, but the proposed system remained unimplemented for the last 27 years.
The commission had recommended formation of a prime minister-led National Security Council and setting up of Joint Intelligence Committee to ensure that the intelligence agencies operate within the parameters of their respective legal mandate.
These proposed institutions were also considered vital to ensure necessary coordination among the intelligence agencies.
What Pakistani badly feel today was recommended by the Commission in 1989. It had proposed: “In order to ensure that the entire intelligence activity at the national level receives a unifiedpolicy direction and there is coordination between various intelligence agencies, it is considered necessary that a Standing Committee of the Cabinet is created for the purpose on the pattern ofthose existing in the UK, USA, Germany, France, India and Israel.”
The Commission had said such a committee might be called"National Security Council" (NSC) and comprises Prime Minister as its chairman and with members includingForeign Minster,Defence Minister,Interior Minister, Finance Minister, Chiefs of three armed forces andchairman of the proposed Joint IntelligenceCommittee.
The Commission had formally requested that theNSC might be entrusted the following tasks:
“a.Formulate Intelligence objectives and monitor their implementation by intelligence andsecurity agencies.
b.Convert inputs received from intelligence into government policy.
c.Ensure that Federal and Provincial resources are harnessed to promote intelligence policy.
d.Review and coordinate intelligence policy.
e.Deliberate and decide on extra-sensitive national issues which cannot be discussed atany other forum.”
About the Joint Intelligence Committee, the Commission had submitted: “A Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) may be created to: -a.Steer Intelligence functions within the framework of the policy directives of the NSC.b.Approve details of Intelligence policies in the light of the overall Intelligence objectives
evolved by NSC.c.Coordinate the working of Intelligence agencies in the country.d.Direct and monitor Intelligence research andanalysis atthe national level.e.Monitor Civil Aviation security at national level.”
It was also suggested: “a.A disinformation Cell may be established as the integral part of JIC.b.The functional control of the National Intelligence Academy (newly proposed, detailsdiscussed later) be vested in JIC. c.Consideration may be given to the development of the existing Technical SupportBureau of ISI into a National Technical Agency and its placement under JIC.”
The Commission report had said the membership of JIC may comprise Chairman JIC (to be a whole-time cabinet-level appointment. He would also be Prime Minister’s Principal Adviser on Intelligence and Security) and members including secretary foreign affairs, secretary defence, secretary interior, secretary finance, Director IB, DG ISI and secretary JIC.
The report was also of the view thatthe Joint Intelligence Committee may be provided a permanent secretariat (JIC Sectt.) to beheaded by a Secretary who may be a serving or retired officer of vast all-round administrative experiencewith deep interest on intelligence work.
The Commission had also noted that thetwo major national level Intelligence agencies — Intelligence Bureauand ISI — may continue to function as such.
It was said that their heads should retainthe right of direct access to the head of the government on Intelligence and Security matters ofnational urgency. However, their roles and functions need to be clearly defined and demarcated.