Why Jirga System is so powerful in Pakistan? / History of Jirgas / How they get power?

 The Jirga system is a traditional assembly or council of respected elders, and it remains deeply entrenched in various parts of Pakistan, particularly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan, and some rural areas of Sindh and Punjab. It is referred to as “Jirga” in KP and Balochistan, “Jirgo” in Sindh, and “Panchayat” in Punjab. It is used to resolve disputes and make decisions by consensus according to customary laws and cultural codes such as Pashtunwali. It is a deeply rooted and age-old conflict resolution mechanism where respected elders gather to deliberate and settle issues ranging from land disputes to blood feuds and social conflicts. The Jirga operates without a formal hierarchy, emphasizing equality among members while respecting elders; decisions are binding on the parties involved.

The Jirga system is an ancient assembly or council of respected elderly people and it is still a very deep rooted tradition in different regions of Pakistan especially Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan and parts of Sindh and Punjab. In KP and Balochistan it is called Jirga, in Sindh Jirgo and in Punjab Panchayat. It finds application in solving dispute and arriving at decisions based on consensus under the customary laws and the cultural codes e.g. Pashtunwali. It is an ancient tribal version of resolving disputes in which respected elders meet and discuss issues such as land conflicts to blood feuds and interpersonal conflicts. There is no formal organisation of members in the Jirga which is characterised by equality of its members, although any decision has to be respected by the parties involved.

The first Jirga system is thought to have originated with the ancient Indo-Iranian (Aryan) tribes who migrated from Central Asia to what is now Afghanistan and parts of South Asia around 5000 to 1500 BC. These tribes practiced early forms of tribal councils known as "simite" (the summit) and "sabhā" (a rural council), which involved elders and tribal chiefs gathering to deliberate and resolve disputes. The king sometimes participated in the "simite" sessions as well, showing the system's early importance. The institutionalized form of the Jirga as known historically among Pashtuns, gained prominence over centuries. One notable early grand Jirga ("Loya Jirga") was held in 1747 by the Abdali tribe in Kandahar, Afghanistan, to elect Ahmad Shah Durrani as leader, marking a significant point in Jirga history. In-short, the Jirga system started in the regions around present-day Afghanistan and Pakistan, rooted in the tribal assemblies of ancient Indo-Iranian Aryan tribes several millennia ago, with formal documented assemblies emerging prominently by the mid-18th century.

It is believed that the first or the earliest Jirga system emerged amongst the ancient Indo Iranian (Aryan) tribes who migrated toward the then Afghanistan and South Asia (present day) in 5000 and 1500 BC. These tribes also had early forms of tribal councils whereby the elders and the tribal chiefs would meet to deliberate and reach a consensus in solving problems, this was referred as simite (the summit) and sabh2 (a rural council). The king also took part in the so-called simite sessions and this demonstrates the earlier significance of the system. John Q. Durant The institutionalized form of the Jirga, as it may be traced, historically, among the Pashtuns, attained a position of prominence after centuries of development. Another early well-known large Jirga (Loya Jirga) was conducated in 1747 by the Abdali tribe in Kandahar, Afghanistan, to elect Ahmad Shah Durrani, as leader, an important milestone in Jirga history. In-short, Jirga system began some thousands of years ago in the areas of present-day Afghanistan and Pakistan in the tribal gathering of tribal ancient Indo-Iranian Aryan tribes, and formal documented assemblies took their shape prominently in the mid 18th century.

Geographically, the Jirga system is prevalent in the tribal and Pashtun-dominated regions of Pakistan, including Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the former Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), as well as parts of Afghanistan. Culturally, it is an integral part of Pashtun society, embodying their social, legal, and moral values. The Jirga system draws its strength from local traditions, Islamic law, and the community's trust in the wisdom and integrity of the elders who comprise it.

The Jirga system’s strength stems from its deep cultural roots, the weakness or inaccessibility of formal state judicial institutions in these areas, and the trust it enjoys among local communities. It provides a cost-effective, accessible, and respected alternative to formal courts, offering quick and socially accepted resolutions. Its authority is derived from community acceptance rather than formal state power, enabling it to function effectively in regions where state institutions may be weak or distrusted. This blend of cultural legitimacy, practical utility, and community trust ensures the continuing relevance and strength of the Jirga system in Pakistan’s tribal regions.

The system of the Jirga is predominant in tribal and Pashtun areas of Pakistan namely Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and former Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA) and part of Afghanistan geographically. It is culturally becoming an inherent aspect of Pashtun society, in which they aspire to integrate their social, legal, and moral values. The Jirga is a system whose strength lies in local traditions, Islamic law as well as local trust in the knowledge and uprightness of the elders to make up Jirga.

The strength of the Jirga system is that it is highly cultural with a strong base, the incompetence or lack of accessibility of state formal judicial system in these regions and the people trust it. It is an affordable, available, and respected alternative to formal courts which offer socially acceptable and fast solutions. The power it has relies on community approval, but not on any established authority of the state and, as such, it is able to operate in areas where state governments are weak or untrusted. The combination of cultural validity, pragmatic applicability, and confidence of the community makes the Jirga system in Pakistani tribal areas become relevant and strong through time.

Under British colonial administration, particularly in Balochistan and the tribal areas, the Jirga system was adapted and formalized to some degree by officials like Sir Robert Sandeman as a governing and dispute resolution tool. This incorporation allowed local tribal leaders to exercise judicial functions on petty crimes and social disputes with oversight from colonial authorities, further embedding the system into local governance structures.

In essence, the Jirga system began as an organic and culturally ingrained community mechanism for peaceful dispute resolution and governance, deeply embedded in tribal traditions, evolving and adapting through centuries of tribal, royal, and colonial administrations to retain its role as a trusted local institution in parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan today. Its endurance is owed to its foundation in communal consensus, customary law, and the social authority of elders rather than formal state power.

British colonial rule, especially in Balochistan and the tribal areas, utilised the Jirga system to an extent and formalised it as a form of governance and dispute resolution mechanism by administrators such as Sir Robert Sandeman. Such integration gave the local tribal governors the opportunity to perform judicial roles on petty offenses and social controversies under the supervision of colonial rulers, further integrating the system with the local governance systems.

By definition, Jirga system started as natural and culturally enrooted community system of peacefully resolving disputes and governance, embedded in tribal dynamics, which was able to evolve and change over hundreds of years under tribal, royal and colonial rule, until the present day when it continues to enjoy the privileged status of a local institution in some regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Its durability is attributed to its basis on the agreement of the community, the law of customs and the social power of the elders as opposed to formal state authority.

Institutionalization of the Jirga:

Under British colonial rule, especially in the tribal areas of present-day Pakistan, the Jirga system was not only tolerated but formally incorporated into the legal framework through the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR) of 1901. The British found direct rule in tribal regions difficult because of the strong tribal codes (Pashtunwali, Riwaj). Instead of replacing local customs, they legalized the Jirga process as an official dispute resolution mechanism under the FCR. This allowed the colonial administration to maintain order without deploying large administrative resources.The Jirga became a bridge between the colonial government and tribal society. The British would appoint Political Agents who could convene Jirgas, select members (usually pro-government elders), and influence decisions. This ensured loyalty among tribal leaders while avoiding direct interference in everyday life.

The FCR empowered Jirgas to impose collective punishments—entire families or tribes could be penalized for the actions of one member. This system kept tribes under pressure to police their own members, aligning with British interests in maintaining security along the frontier. The British favored loyal tribal elders (Maliks) and strengthened their authority through official recognition and financial incentives. This further entrenched traditional leadership structures and made the Jirga not just a cultural institution but also a colonial governance tool. By embedding the Jirga into the formal colonial legal system, the British gave it state-sanctioned legitimacy. This legacy survived after 1947, influencing how Pakistan continued to handle governance and justice in tribal areas until the FCR was finally abolished in 2018 (71 years after formation of Pakistan).

When ruled by the British colonialists, particularly in the tribal belt of what is today Pakistan, the Jirga system was actually tolerated and codified into a legal procedure as the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR) of 1901. The direct rule in the tribal areas was not easy to the British due to the powerful tribal rules (Pashtunwali, Riwaj). Rather than overriding local traditions they codified the Jirga process to become an official means of settling disputes, under the FCR. This enabled the colonial administration to extend order without mobilizing lots of administration.The Jirga played the role of a conduit between the colonial government and the tribal society. Political Agents would be appointed by the British and be allowed to convene Jirga and even make decisions by appointing members and making recommendations. This provided the devotion of the tribal leaders without intruding into the daily life.

According to the FCR Jirgas had the power to mete out collective punishments which means that the whole families or tribe could be punished based on the deeds of one person. This mechanism ensured that tribes were under pressure to govern themselves and this fitted the British interests of ensuring security within the frontier. The British preferred the tribal elders (Maliks) who were loyal and supported their rule by giving official status and payment. This further bolstered traditional forms of leadership, and transformed the Jirga to become not only a cultural institution but also a colonial mechanism of governance. By incorporating the Jirga within the formal colonial law, the British made it legally endorsed by the state. This legacy persisted in the post-1949 context and shaped how Pakistan dealt with tribal areas in terms of governance and justice until the eventual repeal of FCR in 2018 (71 years after the formation of Pakistan) (71).

Now let’s dive into the causes, why jirga system is strong?

1.      Cultural and Social Factors:

The Jirga was not just a legal institution in most tribal and rural societies of Pakistan; it is also an identity and heritage institution. Jirga derives its existence from centuries-old traditions of the Pashtuns, known as Pashtunwali, as well as the Baloch and Sindhi tribes, which are characterized by Riwaj, or the Principles of Land (izzat), hospitality, and community responsibility. By taking part in Jirga decisions, people perceive such an action as the preservation of ancestral customs and defense against external intervention. The format in itself is a representation of group decision-making, where issues are resolved on the basis of open debate instead of hierarchy.

Members of the Jirga are normally elders who are reputable in the sense of possessing wisdom, fairness and having extensive knowledge of the local customs. They do not have a government appointment but earn respect through years of experience within the community and therefore have authority in the community. This carries moral weight with their decisions sometimes being more compelling than a court order, since they are arrived at by well-known and trusted sources and are not strangers like bureaucrats.

Social enforcement is one of the strongest sides of Jirga. When the population has made a decision, the society backs it, and there is then no need to employ the police or other procedural measures, as outsiders are bound to obey it. Such blanket support prevents long feuds, encourages reconciliation, and over time, it makes the society socially cohesive since relationships and reputations are crucial to survival in tightly knit societies.

2.      Practical Advantages over Formal Judiciary:

Jirga gives speedy judgments, whereas even the most severe matters related to legal sources by the State can take months and even years to be handled and concluded in Pakistan. Jirga can just assemble in days and declare its ruling in just one sitting, while a court gives a decision in multiple hearings. Jirga process is economically affordable. It does not involve attorney fees, court fee, or trips all the way to the district courts. Individuals involved in it normally have to cover minimal costs like hosting the elders or giving hospitality. It is especially enticing to the poor families that are unable to meet the expenses of pursuing cases through the formal court system. Courts are physically far away in most of the tribal and rural locations. The pilings of the legal documents and procedures are also challenged by the barrier of literacy. The Jirga on the contrary, functions on the village or tribal level, uses the local language, and in a culturally acceptable way. The relative comfort and closeness render it much more accessible to the people who do not have access to the formal justice system.

3.      Local Power Structures:

The political and social control in most of the rural and tribal regions of Pakistan are wielded by a few influential persons like tribal chiefs, feudal land lords (Waderas) and other powerful families. These are people who tend to take center stage in the Jirga, be it through their membership or influence in its decision-making. This participation helps them in keeping the Jirga rulings in conformity with their interests, which increased their dominance at a local level. The Jirga is an organ through which such power holders control the situation on their own conditions. This way, they do not require the intervention of any external entity when solving disputes locally, and they maintain community affairs under their immediate influence. This maintains the status quo, it prevents them from losing influence, and it makes them vital bridge builders between the people and the state. It is not unusual to find local elites who oppose the extension of state court and administrative jurisdiction into their lands. Any reforms of a state that would weaken their power--e.g., the strengthening of the police, courts or locally-elected councils are opposed. Maintaining the Jirga system, these leaders stay independent of the state and guarantee that the key power to make decisions is located in their hands.

4.      Weakness of State Institutions:

The official court system in Pakistan experiences the problem of case backlogs, delays in the criminal process, and red tape. Even before a trial, a case can last years, and in some cases decades, with one appeal after another, as well as delay after delay. This procedure usually involves legal representation of a lawyer, court charges and affected persons are required to attend hearings severally, leading to its costliness to common citizens, especially those of low-income earning. Those remote and tribal areas lack proper or non-existent state institutions. Police stations can be at a distance in the villages and the court normally in the district head's office, which is tedious and expensive to travel. This geographical inaccessibility renders the system of formal justice virtually inaccessible to the rural populace, who then resort to the Jirga as the sole working system of dispute resolution that they can use. Corruption, political intrusion, and perceived favoritism have been major factors that have led the formal justice system to be seeing in a negative view. It is said that to some people, bribes or political pressure can influence the case investigated by the police, and not every verdict is based on the merit grounds in the court case. On the contrary, to many people in the countryside, the Jirga, though flawed, is more open and closer to familiarity and their culture.

5.      Political Endorsement:

Politicians in Pakistan mostly use the vote and political grip of the tribal leaders, feudal lords and powerful families in the rural and tribal areas of Pakistan. Questioning the Jirga system would place at stake the membership of these local power brokers and their communities. This makes most of the political leaders shy away to directly fight or reform the system even when it goes against constitutional law, as they believe in cordial relations as a way of ensuring the safety of elections. Occasionally the Jirga system has been imposed by politicians and local authorities to resolve conflict during an election campaign or between clashing groups. In that way, they present themselves as community peace makers and community problem solvers and reinforce their political image. In other instances, politicians are involved or are sponsoring Jirgas, to ensure their loyalty with the parties in dispute as well as the community at large, which further engraves the practice in local government.

6.      Criticism and Challenges:

Although the Jirga system is appreciated since it is fast and has a cultural validity, it has been highly criticized due to its violation of very basic human rights mainly when cases involving women come in. Traditional practices like vani or swara where the girls are forcefully married to members of a conflicting family in order to nullify the feud, has its origin in patriarchal tradition and it has been internationally and nationally decried. Women have been viewed as objects instead of persons with legal rights through such rulings. A jirga makes decisions according to the customary norm and not codified law, so there is no formal appeal; there can be no guarantee of due process. There is no system to follow such that the evidence should be carefully analyzed, that legal representation is given, or the ruling is within the constitutional safeguard, unlike in the formal judiciary. The lack of such checks and balances puts at risk the possibility of whimsical and malevolent choices. Since the members of Jirga may be selected to benefit those with power, they may display favoritism to the powerful. The rulings are partial as personal/political/ tribal interests may lead to such decisions. The Jirga can be used to replace and legitimize the inequalities among the parties in the weaker or marginalized cases as opposed to dispensing equal justice.