Role of police in countering terrorism: A comparison between Pakistan and the United Kingdom

This research examines the role of police in counterterrorism in Pakistan and the UK. Pakistan is the principal focus, and the UK acts as a comparator thereto. Pakistan has been referred to as the epicentre of global terrorism, notwithstanding this, its police are woefully ill-prepared to deal with the threat of terrorism. Consequently, its military has tried to fill the vacuum and thus has almost complete control of national security and counterterrorism policy. Its police continue to be side-lined from national security efforts and loathed for their shortcomings. Its civilian institutions, although being the lead institutions as per the law, continue to be marred with severe deficiencies. In contrast, the militarisation of national security has led to a heavy-handed approach and human rights abuses such as missing person phenomena. Its police are in dire need of reforms. When reforms have been needed, Pakistan has looked at the UK for inspiration. Pakistan and the UK have a common legal and administrative system, and its police law is based on UK law. Nevertheless, Pakistan and UK police counterterrorism roles have not been compared despite the several UK inspired laws and institutional structures being practised in Pakistan today. There is arguably no case study which compares UK and Pakistan policing counterterrorism roles. This scholarship, therefore, attempts to fill the gap by comparing most impactful police counterterrorism roles between the UK and Pakistan. This scholarship examines five policing counterterrorism roles 1; what is the role of police in counterterrorism in Pakistan and the UK 2; how is the cooperation between police and intelligence agencies in Pakistan and the UK 3; how is the cooperation between police and prosecution in Pakistan and the UK 4; what is the role of police in de-radicalisation in Pakistan and the UK 5; how are police-public relations in Pakistan and the UK and their impact on counterterrorism. The results show that the police are at the heart of UK counterterrorism efforts due to UK’s preference of criminal justice model over the war model. The UK’s asset is its long unfaltering relationship between its security agencies. UK JTAC has taken its multi-agency cooperation to an unprecedented level. Thirdly, police and prosecution in the UK, work as a team with the ethos of the prosecution team and their cooperation starts even before the investigation commences. The UK is using the special terrorism laws sparingly and is largely staying close to ordinary laws. Fourthly, its police are the lead organisation in the prevention of violent extremism as a multi-agency partner. Finally, UK polices through consent. It has invested in building confidence, the trust of the community, and used community-policing practices to harness police-public cooperation. In comparison, Pakistan counterterrorism policy is militarised. There is a lack of cooperation between police and intelligence agencies. There is a lack of collaboration between police and prosecution. The police have little or no role in current de-radicalisation programs. Poor police public relations (in which the public resent the police and do not trust the police) is another hazard in the Pakistan counterterrorism fight. Consequently, Pakistan can arguably learn from the UK’s experience on the topic