A significant move: FATA’s non-Muslims finally able to obtain domiciles

Governor Mehtab signs summary, directs political agents to begin issuing the document


Our Correspondent April 11, 2015
K-P Governor Sardar Mehtab Ahmad Khan. PHOTO: PPI

PESHAWAR:


After decades of being deprived of the basic right to purchase property or apply for government jobs, non-Muslims in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata) can now obtain domicile certificates, finally enabling them to be eligible for both.

In a historic move, Governor Sardar Mehtab Ahmed Khan signed a summary in this regard on Saturday.


Well-placed sources told The Express Tribune that the FATA Secretariat had forwarded a summary to the governor two weeks ago regarding Fata’s religious minorities’ demand for the issuance of domiciles.

According to the insider, the governor approved the summary after consulting legal experts and taking relevant officials into confidence. “The formal notification announcing the issuance of domiciles to Fata’s non-Muslims will be issued in the coming days,” he said.

Meanwhile, Governor Mehtab has directed the political administrations of all seven agencies and six frontier regions to begin issuing the document which carries much significance for Pakistan’s citizens.

A history of exclusion

The existing administrative set up of Fata came into being in 1901 through an executive order of the then British government, after the promulgation of the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR).

While Hindus and Sikhs had been residing in their ancestral villages in various parts of the tribal areas for centuries, Christians began arriving and settling in the region when British officers were posted there as civil administrators. During the British Raj, domiciles were not of much importance to Fata’s non-Muslims, but that changed after Independence.

According to Fata’s rules and regulations, the political agent of an agency is authorised to issue a domicile to a resident. He can do so on the basis of the requesting individual’s association with local tribes. However, non-Muslims do not belong to any of the tribes, therefore, they are not eligible to be issued a Fata domicile and for decades remained deprived of this right.

The issue came to light some two years ago when Arshad Masih, an elder of the Christian community in Landikotal, Khyber Agency, pointed it out at a meeting of civil society organisations. Masih demanded the archaic stipulation be revoked and his demand was backed by other minorities’ elders, Haroon Sarbdiyal, Sardar Charanjeet and Augustine Jacob.

Subsequently, the South Asia Partnership Pakistan’s Peshawar chapter formally made the demand a part of its agenda on the rights of expression and religious freedom.

In an earlier interview with The Express Tribune, Masih said, “Our forefathers settled in Fata in 1914 after migrating from Sialkot and since then we are here and our many generations have grown up and passed away, but we don’t have the right to purchase even an inch of land and property in the area.”

‘This is our home’

Thousands of non-Muslims call the tribal belt their home. Christian activist Augustine Jacob believes there are between 5,000 and 6,000 people living in Fata who belong to religious minority groups, while Sarbdiyal said the population of Christians in Fata is around 17,000, while 3,200 Sikhs and the same number of Hindus also reside there.

However, the number cannot be verified because of lack of official recorded figures. Moreover, a large number of Sikhs and Hindus have left the region because of violence, insecurity and increasing religious persecution.

Both Sarbdiyal and Jacob have welcomed the governor’s decision, saying the issuance of domiciles would resolve long-standing problems that Fata’s minorities are facing, especially, employment in government institutions, admission in educational institutions as well as procurement of property.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 12th, 2015.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ