Abdul Wahab who lost his leg in a blast | Aurangzaib Khan
In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the civilian compensation mechanism is quite efficient due to delegation of powers to award compensation to district authorities. Punjab shows the same efficiency in providing compensation to the families of policemen, according to the I-SAPS review.
Officials in Lahore say the draft for a law on awarding compensation has been finalised and would be sent to the Punjab chief minister, the provincial cabinet and the provincial assembly for approval soon. “It requires clarity on financial issues so we have forwarded it to the finance department,” says Dr Syed Abul Hassan Najmi, secretary of the Law and Parliamentary Affairs Department in Lahore.
An official in Punjab’s home department tells the Herald that Punjab studied Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s draft law as well as the compensation law of Balochistan to develop its own. “This has helped us prepare the best ever draft for our law,” says the official.
In Sindh, Humaira Almani, a member of Sindh Assembly from the ruling PPP, has moved a private member bill on compensation payment. With the bill still pending approval, the provincial government follows a compensation policy which “is hard to navigate, especially when political parties also claim to be victims of terrorism [perpetrated by the state as well as non-state actors],” says a source in the Sindh government.
Also read: Triangle of terrorism
Sindh, however, has a dedicated head of account – with an annual allocation of 300 million rupees – for the payment of compensation. In view of frequent conflicts over succession or heirship, Sindh’s chief minister has made it mandatory for the compensation documents to be verified by a mukhtiarkar — the revenue officer posted at taluka level.
Azad Jammu and Kashmir has two specific laws that “deal with the provision of relief and compensation to civilians suffering physical and financial loss as a result of accidents, calamities, epidemics and incidents along the ceasefire line,” according to the I-SAPS study. In Gilgit Baltistan, a draft law designed by I-SAPS was shared with the previous cabinet of the region but has been in limbo since then.
In the absence of a uniform national policy, chances that the authorities themselves would violate official procedures, leading to delays, underhand deals and disproportionate allocations will always remain. Officials and policy experts agree there should be a uniform policy across Pakistan but they also say the chances of all stakeholders in all the provinces reaching a consensus are slim. The way things are, says an official in Punjab, authorities are more inclined towards formulating compensation policies at a provincial level because “it is an easy task that doesn’t involve an extensive [consultative] exercise.”
On a Sunday, there is little traffic on the road that meanders through the verdant farmlands of Takhtbai in Mardan district. Farmers with plastic bags full of farm produce – cucumbers, melons, lychee and okra – sit under trees, waiting for customers who stop by for better deals on this rural road.
Abdul Wahab, holding crutches, is not hard to recognise as he lumbers out of the shadows of a thatched-roof restaurant along the road. His dark ruddy complexion betrays a vocation that once kept him by the fireside — slipping flat patties of chapli kebabs into a pan simmering with animal fat. These days someone else does the frying at his New Wahab Hotel — once a roadside kebab stall with a fire pit but now offering everything from lentils to vegetables. Wahab now manages the restaurant, employing 13 local hands including his brothers.
On June 18, 2013, he went to Shergarh near Mardan to attend the funeral of a friend. He stood for funeral prayers next to Imran Mohmand, an independent member of the provincial assembly, and woke up five days later in a hospital. The suicide bombing at the funeral that killed 70 people including Mohmand had left Wahab with a disfigured arm and only one leg.
The eldest of five brothers, Wahab was the main earning hand for his family. For him and others who could not access monetary compensation provided by the provincial government, because they did not have bank accounts, help came when they were visited in the hospital by an assessment team from the Civilian Victims Support Project (CVSP) run by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The project was modelled after similar USAID projects in Afghanistan and Iraq and assisted the “non-military, non-police, non-combatant, non-civil service population” in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata) during three years of its operation between 2012 and 2015, helping some 12,000 civilians affected by incidents of terrorism that took place between 2007 and 2015. The project, amounting to some 25 million US dollars, provided a host of services such as emergency medical assistance, business start-up support and scholarships for the children of the victims.
Click to see more
The project involved community leaders, the police, hospital staff and the district government in eligibility verification and needs assessment for compensation — and started with the immediate provision of food support to the families of the victims, who were often poor. “The first thing we did was to provide food enough to last for three to four months because they had lost breadwinners,” says Akif Khan, who has worked with the project.
The project seems to have restored the faith of people like Wahab in assistance that can be helpful. He and other victims received rations worth 45,000 rupees each; his three children received scholarships that paid for their education for five years. But it was the help he received in the ninth month of his recovery – when the project gave him restaurant equipment worth 400,000 rupees – that changed his life. The equipment included kitchen tables, chairs, deep freezers and cutlery. “I got assistance at a time when I needed it most. People in my position commit suicide. Having a business has earned me respect at home and in the community,” says Wahab, who is still receiving treatment for his injuries.
While they may exist, instances of government compensation transforming civilian lives are hard to trace. Part of the reason is that the bureaucracy that deals with provision of compensation is not trained or keen on documentation and follow-ups. Nor is it keen on building the image of the provincial or the federal government it represents.
For those working for institutions such as the army and the police, compensation is sustained and long-term. Compensation to terror victims in the army is determined and announced by the Shuhada Cell (Martyrs Cell) that works under the Pakistan Army Welfare and Rehabilitation Directorate. According to a Lahore-based army official, compensation for the families of the martyred soldiers is “attractive”, comprising various long-term benefits. “The cash compensation varies according to ranks and grades,” says the official, requesting anonymity because he is not authorised to speak to the media. “It normally starts from five million rupees for the family of a martyred jawan and increases gradually with change in rank or grade.”
Besides cash compensation, the family of a martyred soldier is entitled to a residential plot in a developed housing society — such as the Defence Housing Authority (DHA). The widow of an army man killed in an incident of terrorism receives complete salary of her deceased husband for life and the children of dead soldiers get education in army education institutions for free, along with free healthcare.
The compensation package for soldiers injured in terror attacks is also “handsome”, says the official. “Under this, the injured soldiers not only receive the best medical treatment in army hospitals, they also get cash compensation.”
For civilians, however, compensation is only a one-time consolation. Their financial circumstances – often greatly reduced by the loss of an income earner – are not improved by the payment of compensation either. Most civilians injured in terrorist attacks are not left with much due to expensive medical treatments.
For many, compensation is as much a bane as it is a blessing.
Marzia and Shazia have little in common except that they both live in the same city and have lost their dear ones to terrorism. For Shazia, it was her husband. For Marzia, two sons. Both of them have recently moved out of the houses where they were living.
The Chowlo Bouri neighbourhood on the outskirts of Quetta is a heap of broken concrete, rutted roads and layers of fine dust settled over the land. There is nary a green bush in sight, and only discarded plastic growing out of the earth. Markets and houses are hastily built blocks of brick, with little attention paid to aesthetics or architecture. People here are mainly poor Afghans, sitting outside their shacks, leaning against walls in the sun, lazily picking their teeth with toothpicks for want of something better to do.
The neighbourhood seems to have sprouted in the way wild things grow and is just as disorderly. It is the sort of place where people survive by sheer will — like a thorn tree in a desert, with no apparent source for sustenance.
Shazia Imran lives here with her married sister. Next door to their tiny, cramped house in a quiet street lives her father, another reason why she chose to come here after she left the home of her in-laws at Sabzal Road in Quetta. Her husband Imran Shiekh was a cameraman for Samaa TV. He, and a Samaa TV reporter Saifurrehman, were killed in a suicide blast while covering the bombing of a snooker club on Alamdar Road in 2013.
Illustration by Aan Abbas
“I was watching the news that night after the first bombing,” says Shazia, her hazel eyes large and sad in her oval face. “Then there was a news alert saying that Samaa TV’s cameraman was missing. After a while they flashed his picture saying Imran was dead.”
A month later, on February 16, 2013, another bomb blast hit Quetta. This time it was Marzia searching for her sons Zulfiqar and Shujaat amid the carnage wreaked by the water tanker bomb in Hazara Town. They had gone for their English language class and had not returned. Sometime later that day, a local imambargah called her and told her that the body of one of her sons had been found.
“He had turned to coal. They recognised him from a childhood injury that had left a dent in his ankle bone,” says Marzia, sorrow in her face haloed by a printed red chador. She never found the body of her other son.
Marzia received compensation for losing Shujaat but the loss of her elder son, Zulfiqar, went uncompensated because his body was nowhere to be found. Many were never found after the blast that is said to have killed as a many as 200 people, though the official death toll is put at less than 100. “They only found a large number of body parts. That day, a woman in the neighbourhood went around knocking at doors, asking people to look for her son’s head on their rooftops so she could bury him,” says Marzia.
When someone loses his life to terrorism, his family thinks the compensation money belongs to all of them.
When she applied for compensation for Zulfiqar, she was told she would have to go to court to prove that he had died in the blast. Having already lost her husband, a labourer, in a target killing during 2008, she had little understanding of how the system works. And then there were concerns about security, linked to multiple levels of her vulnerability: an uneducated person, a woman, a Hazara, a widow. So she decided to let Zulfiqar’s case go. Even in Shujaat’s case, she got compensation after a year and a half because, unbeknown to her, her identity card had expired.
When she finally got the compensation money, she put away 400,000 rupees in a bank; the rest she invested in moving to a bigger house. She also receives 5,000 rupees every month from the Shuhada Foundation, a social support organisation that takes care of Shia victims of terrorism all over Pakistan.
The loss that Marzia and Shazia suffered propelled their lives into different dimensions.
Samaa TV gave Shazia three million rupees and it continues to support the education of her two daughters. She also has a son born seven months after Imran’s death. In addition to what she got from Samaa TV, the government paid her one million rupees. She gave 500,000 rupees to her parents-in-law, who had always been kind to her. The rest she put in a bank which pays her 30,000 a month in profit. Her husband’s monthly pay was 32,000 rupees.
When her husband died, she had thought her brother-in-law would take care of her. But although he loved her children, says Shazia, he did not want her around anymore. He and his wife turned abusive toward her. To avoid being nagged all the time, Shazia moved to her sister’s place. “My daughter cannot live with that man anymore,” says Nizamuddin, Shazia’s father.
Compensation leading to such rifts within the families of victims is quite common. When someone loses his life to terrorism, his family thinks the compensation money belongs to all of them. But the law only provides for legal heirs. “A widow once came to us saying her in-laws had frozen the bank account with 400,000 rupees of compensation money in it,” says Cheema, the Quetta-based senior police officer. “When a woman loses a spouse, she gets compensation but she also loses the support of her in-laws and is forced into social isolation.”
Akbar Durrani, the home department secretary in Quetta, explains why. “Women are often uneducated, gullible or ignorant. They are forced to name their fathers-in-law as guardian,” he says. “Often, they are blackmailed or harassed by other members of the family to give up claims to succession.”
DIG Cheema was serving in Lahore in 2011 when Raymond Davis, an American intelligence contractor, killed two men who, according to media reports, had stopped him on the road to rob him. Other reports say the men were security – read intelligence – personnel following Davis. Whatever the identity of the dead men, the American government eventually paid 24 million US dollars as “blood money” to their legal heirs. When the compensation money finally reached the families, the widow of one of the victims and her mother were killed by her father because the widow wanted to marry someone other than her dead husband’s brother. The murder was prompted by her father’s desire to keep the compensation money within the family, says Cheema.
Rescue operation underway at the Qissa Khawani bazaar following a blast in September 2013 | Shahbaz Butt, White Star Shazia also received money from an insurance company that provides group insurance to the members of Quetta Press Club. The officials of the club have a straightforward rationale for the insurance scheme: While journalists receive government compensation as civilians when they die in acts of terrorism, many of them, instead, lose lives in targeted shootings which the government refuses to treat as terror attacks. “The state says they had enmities, supported insurgents or were not journalists at all,” says Saleem Shahid, the Quetta-based Bureau Chief for daily Dawn . About 43 journalists have been killed in Balochistan over the last decade but the government acknowledges only 20 deaths as terror related, he says and adds: “We, however, want them all to be compensated.” That is where the press club facilitated life insurance scheme comes in handy.
The press club’s compensation scheme is also premised on the argument that Balochistan is a warzone and ordinary compensation policies do not apply to journalists working here. “There is a difference between journalists here and those working elsewhere,” says Shahzada Zulfiqar, a Quetta-based veteran reporter. “We are surrounded by terrorists, hostile courts and state authorities.”
While many assassinated journalists in Pakistan are not recognised as terrorism victims, others receive support from unlikely sources. Chief Minister Punjab Shahbaz Sharif doled out a hefty amount of money from the public exchequer for Wali Khan Babar, a television reporter killed in Karachi in 2011. Babar did not even belong to Punjab.
Malik Din has bled a lot. First from injuries and then from surgeries.
He regained consciousness slowly – on the fourth day of the blast that had knocked him out – and found himself in Miranshah District Hospital. With consciousness came recollection: mutilated bodies after the explosion enveloped in the dust and smoke that covered everything.
Din was lucky to have survived an American drone strike that killed a hundred people on June 24, 2009, including five children and 35 tribesmen (others are said to be militants from Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan). Din was in Chenakai village in Ladha sub-division of South Waziristan tribal agency to offer his condolences for the death of a local tribesman, Khwaz Wali, when the drone hit. It shattered his arm, his leg and one half of his hip. He also sustained injuries on his chin and head.
“After initial treatment, I was referred to Bannu District Hospital where I went through eight different surgeries,” says Din. It took him three years to recover.
Since 2004, there have been 442 drone attacks in Pakistan’s tribal areas, killing between 2,494 and 3,994 people, according to the London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism that collects and collates data on drone strikes. Of those killed in drone strikes, between 423 and 965 are civilians, with 172 to 207 children among them. While the last documented drone strike in Pakistan was in January 2016, not a single civilian drone victim has been paid any compensation so far.
Until 2015, the US recognised civilian deaths from drone attacks only as “collateral damage.” The deaths of Warren Weinstein, an American, and Giovanni Lo Porto, an Italian – held hostage by al-Qaeda in Pakistan’s tribal areas – in a drone attack in January 2015 changed that. Following intense international pressure, US President Barack Obama apologised for the deaths, saying his administration “took full responsibility” for the tragedy. The families of the two were also compensated although the amount paid was not made public.
In a report, Do We Not Bleed?: International Failure to Redress Pakistani Victims of US Drone Strikes , launched in December 2015, the Foundation for Fundamental Rights (FFR), an Islamabad-based legal rights group, and Reprieve, a British human rights organisation, demanded justice and compensation for the victims of drone strikes. Shahzad Akbar of the FFR told the media at the launch of the report: “Not a penny of the US government’s Pakistani Civilian Assistance Fund, that totalled around 40 million US dollars, has reached any of the drone strikes victims.”
There have long been international demands that the American government pay compensation to the heirs of those victims of drone strikes who are not militants. A report, titled Will I be next? , published by the international human rights group, Amnesty International, says the US government should ensure that victims of unlawful drone strikes have access to “restitution, compensation and rehabilitation.” A Human Rights Watch report, Between a Drone and al-Qaeda , calls on the American government to “implement a system of prompt and meaningful compensation for civilian loss of life, injury, and property damage from unlawful attacks”.
The compensation made to the families of the European and American victims of drone strikes has also led to questions about “racism”. A European or American life is worth a million dollars, says Akbar, but a Pakistani life is worth nothing. Even in Afghanistan, the Americans ended up paying 320 US dollars for a cow mistakenly killed in a drone strike.
Hazara mourners shout slogans as they gather next to the coffins carrying the remains of those killed in a blast in Quetta in 2013 | AFP
Not that the Pakistani state recognises the predicament of drone victims either — or compensates them. For a long time now, Pakistani authorities have only paid lip service to civilian deaths by condemning drone attacks while secretly acquiescing to them. Duplicity in Pakistan’s policy becomes apparent in that Islamabad does not deem the civilian victims of drone strikes in Fata as eligible for compensation.
On the other hand, the government actively supports the civilian victims of its own military operations against terrorists in Fata. While verifying cases for compensation, the army is consulted to find out if a person or property is hit by “friendly fire”, says a section officer at Peshawar-based Fata Secretariat that deals with compensation cases in the tribal areas. “The army also confirms if the legal heir of a victim is a terrorist or not.”
The initial request for compensation comes from the office of the political agent in a tribal agency and the Fata secretariat provides funds for payment which is made through a cheque. Here, too, the price of life is not uniform. While the family of each civilian killed gets only 300,000 rupees – less than anywhere else in Pakistan – a security official’s family gets three million rupees if he is killed in a friendly fire or a terrorist attack.
From Fata to Karachi and from Gilgit Baltistan to Balochistan, in unknown streets and neighbourhoods, there are broken, interrupted lives, lived desperately among the debris of bonds severed by violent death. And there are martyrs aplenty.
In a society where everyone aspires to the title of a martyr, in name if not in deed, and where the dead are often treated as martyrs – whether civilian victims of terrorism or members of the security forces for whom death in the line of duty is part of their professional brief – who really is a martyr?
“When you join the military and the police, you do so with an understanding that death is part of the deal,” says the father of a student who was injured in the APS attack. “For civilians, we cannot say they are martyrs. They are victims.” For a soldier or a policeman who dies for the country, the title rings true because they die for a cause, he says. For a civilian victim for terrorism, then, what is the cause?
Martyrdom is something that people accept when they are willing to die for a cause. In that sense, calling [civilian victims of terrorism] martyrs is a joke, says Faizullah Jan, the author of a 2015 book, Muslim Extremist Discourse . The state uses a title to hide itself from the fact that they were murdered because of its negligence, he says. The rest of the guilt is washed off with compensation payment. “The culture of compensation absolves the state of responsibility [to provide protection to citizens] and it also justifies a culture of martyrdom,” says Jan. “When the government compensates people for their losses, it hides flaws in the system — saying ‘saving you is not, or is beyond, my capacity or responsibility.’”
Institutional justification apart, in a country where ‘martyrdom’ is commonplace happenstance, few care for or actually have a deeper understanding of the ‘cause’ that took away their breadwinner. “As a nation, we trade in misery,” says Dr Altaf Khan, a professor at the journalism school in Peshawar University. “We use compensation and titles to exalt innocent people whose lives have been brutally cut short by acts of terrorism in order to evade our responsibility to go after terrorists and bring them to justice.” When the state compensates victims, attributing whatever noble intentions to compensation, says Altaf Khan, “it chooses charity over responsibility.”
Compensation can bring momentary consolation but how does it pay for the social, economic and psychological effects of the loss of a loved one, especially if it is something occurring routinely on a massive scale, as it is doing in Pakistan? “It is not normal – not healthy – if people are dying every day,” says Altaf Khan. To fix things, he says, “we will have to address the causes of the conflict.”
Additional reporting by Saher Baloch in Karachi and Khalid Hasnain in Lahore.
Opening illustration by Sabir Nazar.
This story originally appeared in the Herald's February 2016 issue. To read more, subscribe to the Herald in print.