By Malik Bilal
PESHAWAR: Few events in recent decades have reshaped Pakistan’s governance landscape as profoundly as the 2018 merger of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP). This historic act not only integrated Pakistan’s most historically marginalized region but also prompted a broader rethinking of governance, justice delivery and institutional reform across both the merged and settled districts of the province. Enacted through the 25th Constitutional Amendment, the merger abolished the colonial-era Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR) and extended Pakistan’s judicial, legislative and administrative frameworks to the newly merged districts. However, both merged and settled areas now face the challenge of harmonizing traditional systems of dispute resolution with constitutional guarantees and state institutions.
At the heart of traditional governance in both the merged and settled districts lies the Jirga, a centuries-old forum for resolving conflicts through community consensus, elder authority and reconciliation. Deeply embedded in local culture, the Jirga has long served as an accessible, swift and trusted mechanism for resolving civil, criminal and land-related disputes. Its strengths lie in its simplicity, cultural legitimacy and restorative nature. However, the traditional Jirga system is not without limitations. Its decisions are rarely documented or appealable, often exclude women and marginalized voices and sometimes conflict with fundamental human rights. As Pakistan strives to unify its legal frameworks, a critical challenge has emerged: how can this indigenous model of justice be adapted to work alongside the formal legal system?
In response, the KP government enacted the Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) Act in 2020. This landmark legislation granted legal recognition to traditional practices such as mediation, arbitration, and community-led jirgas, all reimagined within a formal ADR framework. Under the Act, district-level ADR committees were established, supervised by the Deputy Commissioner and comprising retired judges, legal practitioners, religious scholars and respected elders. These forums are authorized to mediate civil, family, property and compoundable criminal cases, provided that both parties consent. Resolutions are formally documented and where necessary, submitted to courts or administrative bodies for enforcement. This approach serves as a vital bridge between informal justice and state legality, extending its application to all districts of the province.
Despite its legislative foundation, the ADR system faces serious implementation challenges. Many committees are inactive or lack operational infrastructure. There is a pressing need to fully operationalize the ADR system, with proper physical setups, administrative backing and dedicated budgets. The selection of ADR committee members also requires urgent reform. Appointments must be made purely on merit by Deputy Commissioners and Commissioners to ensure the credibility and neutrality of the process. In several districts, committee members lack the legal understanding or mediation skills necessary for fair dispute resolution. Comprehensive training in legal procedures, community mediation, documentation standards and gender sensitivity is essential for all ADR personnel. A particularly concerning issue is gender exclusion. Many ADR committees lack female representation, even in cases that directly involve women. This exclusion undermines both fairness and effectiveness. While cultural resistance remains entrenched, it must be addressed directly. Including women as mediators and decision-makers should be a non-negotiable policy priority.
The merger also replaced the colonial-era Political Agent system with a decentralized civil administration led by Deputy Commissioners and supported by integrated line departments. These reforms aimed to align merged districts with the Local Government Act and the broader provincial structure. However, the transition requires more than bureaucratic restructuring. It demands institutional capacity-building, community trust and legal awareness, especially in regions long governed by informal norms. In settled districts, despite stronger institutions, similar reforms are needed to promote ADR as a credible community-based mechanism that relieves pressure on formal courts and supports reconciliation.
Development partners of USAID, such as UNDP’s Merged Areas Governance Program (MAGP), played a crucial role in improving governance and justice systems across the province. Their efforts included ADR trainings, digitization of land records and the facilitation of inclusive community dialogues. These interventions introduced systemic reforms while fostering trust in public institutions by offering culturally resonant, locally accessible justice solutions. However, the suspension of USAID funding and the subsequent closure of MAGP dealt a major blow. Institutional momentum was disrupted, leaving gaps in service delivery, capacity-building and community engagement. Most critically, the absence of neutral facilitators has curtailed the platforms through which citizens previously voiced grievances and co-developed governance solutions. The risk of backsliding in local peace-building, public participation and institutional trust is both real and growing.
Importantly, the revival of the Jirga system under ADR is not a top-down administrative maneuver. It aims to empower communities from the grassroots. Local councils are encouraged to establish peace forums and mediation panels, while civil society organizations play a pivotal role in mobilizing participation, raising legal awareness and ensuring transparency. Many also work to train female mediators and encourage gender-inclusive practices. This is an essential step toward overcoming the legacy of exclusion in traditional Jirgas.
Despite progress, key challenges persist. Inconsistent standards across districts result in varied ADR quality and fairness. Some forums remain under the influence of local elites or political actors, undermining neutrality. Administrative capacity gaps, including a shortage of trained staff, inadequate digital systems and weak monitoring tools, continue to hinder performance. Legal illiteracy among citizens and a lack of community awareness further weaken the system. Coordination between ADR committees, district administration and the judiciary remains underdeveloped. The ADR framework has yet to fully reconcile traditional norms with constitutional safeguards, leading to ambiguity regarding enforcement and institutional credibility. Socio-political dynamics, tribal rivalries and historical grievances complicate consensus-building. The absence of culturally sensitive yet legally sound standard operating procedures further undermines the system’s credibility and functionality.
To realize ADR’s full potential, several steps are urgently needed. The government must institutionalize ADR within provincial judicial and administrative systems through dedicated units, staff and funding. Standard operating procedures must be localized and harmonized, balancing cultural relevance with legal clarity. Community legal education, especially for women and youth, should be prioritized. Gender-inclusive ADR training must become mandatory at the district level. Regular third-party evaluations and public grievance mechanisms should be introduced to build trust. Member selection must be merit-based and committee members should receive thorough training on the overall ADR mechanism. Technology can support these reforms through case tracking, digital record-keeping and performance monitoring. Integrating ADR indicators into district performance reviews will also help institutionalize long-term accountability.
Reviving the Jirga system within a rights-respecting, legally sound framework, while simultaneously strengthening civil administration, offers a strategic fusion of tradition and modern governance. If implemented with care, equity and transparency, this hybrid model of justice can reduce the burden on courts, increase citizen trust in the state and contribute to a more peaceful, inclusive and just society across all districts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
About the Author: Malik Bilal is a seasoned development professional with expertise in emergency response, recovery and governance in conflict-affected areas of Pakistan. He has worked with UN agencies and international organizations to strengthen community resilience, support institutional reforms and lead strategic program implementation. Malikbilal1983@gmail.com
