In the name of security

There is a fine line between security and luxury. The public is well aware of the threats to their lives that politicians face, particularly from militant groups. So, there is an awareness that a certain measure of protection must be provided to those politicians who could be targets. Equally, there is no denying that many in power abuse that privilege. Protocol is taken to absurd lengths and roads are shut down for the use of politicians and their entourages. There have been many cases of people dying because ambulances couldn’t navigate blocked roads. An additional wrinkle is added during election time when politicians can use the benefits of security paid for by the state while campaigning. The Supreme Court, in a suo motu case on the use of luxury vehicles by government officials and politicians, has now clamped down on this misuse by ordering politicians to pay for their own security. It has also placed restrictions on the type of car that can be used, with politicians prohibited from using bullet-proof vehicles during the campaign.

As a stopgap measure, the Supreme Court decision can work in preventing politicians from essentially getting the state to pay for their travel and security during election time. For it to do so, the Election Commission of Pakistan will have to strictly enforce the judgement of the Supreme Court. But there needs to be a wider reform of how essential security services provided by the state are abused by the political class. The next parliament should pass laws to govern the use of security and protocol. While it is reasonable to expect the state to bear the costs of necessary security incurred while carrying out official duties, it should be incumbent on politicians to reimburse the state for any security provided during personal time. This shouldn’t even be an issue during election time as none of the candidates hold official government positions and so are entitled to no more security at official expense than any other citizen. That the political class still expects the taxpayer to bear the burden of its security shows just how entitled it has become. For the time being, the Supreme Court decision will have to suffice but we need to rethink how much money is being spent providing politicians with extravagant entourages and luxury vehicles in the name of security.