In the face of the modern age of globalization, how should we treat old and indigenous social institutions? What happens when new and more scientific social sector institutions try to override the old and traditional patterns of a society and force them to change? Is there a way in which the new, more dominant, and of course more codified systems benefit from and collaborate with the traditional systems to bring forward the synergies of two different sets of understandings?

For the students of political science and international relations, the nation state system, through the instruments of democratic governance, should ensure continued progress and growth of societies. A sociologist, however finds enormous richness in the traditional and indigenous social mechanisms, which are duly credited for carrying the societies through the difficult periods of their history, giving them energy and helping them go on. This very practical aspect of traditional practices, combined with the love and appreciation indigenous people have for the past, gives indigenous people the confidence needed to continue to utilize their traditional institutions.

The meeting point between the new and the old systems therefore is of critical importance to those who wish to see things right. The negotiation between the two must meet the standards of justice if the change desired is to be positive and sustainable. The western democratic system brings with it many new ideas of equity and social justice. Its task then becomes selling these new ideas to the older generations and remote societies in such a way that they find advantage in leaving behind their rich and inherited cultures. In the process, many of the old practices that are rooted in local wisdom are discarded as people seek out the better life promised in the modern systems. What is often neglected is how the ancient traditions and practices can inform the modern systems.

The Pukhtoon Jirga is one such institution, which according to modern standards of governance, apparently seems to have outlived its utility. Yet an overwhelming majority of people living under this system, sing its praises. The latest example of the Loya Jirga at Bonn in the spring of 2002, used to form an Afghan national government after three decades of civil war, is a good example of use and viability of traditional institutions. In this Afghan scenario, when nothing else worked, the people of Afghanistan put their trust in a Jirga to help them recover from a state of anarchy and decide for their future. Suddenly, the Loya Jirga—its history, procedure, and jurisdiction—became visible to the greater world community.

Historically a people of unique characteristics, Pukhtoon societies have held the concept of Jirga quite sacred to them and have allowed this institution to rule them throughout their known histories. Loya Jirga is just one component of what we know about Jirga. Jirga has operated in the Pukhtoon culture in many horizontal and vertical ways. It is a dispute resolution body at all levels. It has legislative characteristics, plays a diplomatic role, and enjoys many more roles that have rarely been articulated.

We have tried to identify some of the processes of Jirga through describing what Jirga is as well as when, where, why, how, and for whom Jirga works. Our desires are to document various micro processes involved in Jirga, introduce it and its dynamics to those outside of the culture who are dealing with Pukhtoon groups, and to help the Pukhtoons develop Jirga to meet the challenges of present times.

To our understanding, the outside world, with their peculiar worldviews, needs information on Jirga and Pukhtoonwali but find it difficult to agree with what little Pukhtoon worldview offers. The barrier in communication created by the worldview differences is little appreciated particularly by the modern day NGOs and donor community. Rather than discarding an indigenous tradition, the outside world needs to better understand what Pukhtoons have to say, give them confidence to say more, sensitize them to important issues and support them towards education and development. An outright opposition of a deep-rooted culture like Pukhto can contribute little towards developments.

The apparently closed nature of Jirga and its absolute reliance on the Pukhtoon cultural paradigm, the code of Pukhtoonwali, obliges us to explore the Pukhtoon worldview as we talk more about Jirga. While recognizing the danger of overgeneralization, we note that Pukhtoons are typically traditionalists, conservative and devoted to their culture (Pukhtoonwali). Their loyalty to Pukhtoonwali earns them a sense of pride, sometimes leading to ethnocentric attitudes, which outsiders find difficult to understand and accept.

We have tried to present Jirga in its many forms, as is apparent from the table of contents. We would like, however, to provide some initial clarity about our view of Jirga and what it is not. Jirga, in its current form, is not a government or a ruling body. It is not a purely legislative body, nor it is a judicial entity. We see Jirga as a set of processes with similar purposes as many well-known social practices, such as peacebuilding and development. Jirga is operative only in the Pukhtoon areas and its substantive part is governed by the code of Pukhtoonwali.

Because of its roots in Pukhtoonwali, one has to visit the history of Pukhtoons and explore some prominent features of Pukhtoonwali at the outset. Pukhtoonwali is the code under which Jirga finds its jurisdiction and authority. Outside the code, we find that Jirga is a set of processes meant to build communications between parties and people. Beyond this simple capacity of allowing people and parties to talk, Jirga is tied intrinsically to Pukhtoonwali.

A study of Pukhtoonwali will help distinguish between Pukhtoonwali and Jirga. It will also help in finding the links between the two. Through that process we can address the limitations as well as the possibilities of this old system. Along with this, we hope to create space for the Pukhtoons to address some outstanding issues between the Pukhtoon culture and the outside world.

◄Main | ▲Top

RESEARCHING JIRGA

The complexities involved in describing Jirga can best be understood in the following fable. A few blind persons wanted to see an elephant, but since they were blind, they needed to touch in order to see. Each person got hold of a different part of the elephant and tried to understand how the whole elephant looked. The person who held the leg of the elephant said that an elephant looks like the trunk of a tree. The one who touched the tusk said that the elephant is like a spear. The one who touched the body said that the elephant is like a wall, the one on the tail said that an elephant is like a rope. The descriptions of Jirga are like these found in this story. Our job as researchers has been to sift through the disparate understandings and stories of Jirga and attempt to describe its whole.

This work is an outcome of over two hundred qualitative interviews conducted with a wide range of individuals and groups of Jirga people in formal and informal sessions. Our research spread over about 18 months, during which we traveled extensively in the tribal and settled areas of NWFP and Balochistan in Pakistan, and parts of Afghanistan. Initially we were scheduled to hold only 60 structured interviews with professional Jirga people, but as we advanced our understanding of the different dynamics of Jirga, we got more and more involved in talking to people. Other than the professional Jirga people, we found amazing information in talking to the common people who live under the influence of the Jirga system. We also spoke to a number of people from NGOs and women working on advocacy. The Afghan refugee camps provided us with many resource people from a wide range of areas in Afghanistan.

The methodology of research through qualitative interviews suited our work because, although there are comments and remarks on the Jirga traditions in a number of books written by local as well as foreign writers, to our knowledge, the subject of Jirga has never been a focus of such an extensive study before. We wanted to keep the scope of our work as wide as possible so that future studies on various aspects may commence by interested individuals and groups.

As the title suggests, this work represents an overview of the institution of Jirga, raising some very basic issues and questions. The idea is to simply present the Jirga as it is understood.

There are five basic objectives of the work:

1. To document dynamics of Jirga,

2. To introduce Jirga to the outside world,

3. To look at Jirga as a peacebuilding body,

4. To present Jirga as a grass-roots organization, and

5. To initiate a dialogue regarding the future of Jirga.

The work therefore addresses a wide range of clients including Foreign Governments, Academic Institutions, Non-Governmental Development Organizations and the local population.

The write up provides some patterns of Jirga as defined by our interviewees and seen on the ground. Jirga represents different ideas to different people and, therefore, we have tried to identify each shade of Jirga and each profile of it in very broad terms. This will be helpful for us as we attempt to differentiate between the substantially different forms of Jirga, all of which carry the name of Jirga. On the political side, Jirga is found to be operating at three levels: the national level—more popularly known as Loya Jirga, the regional level, and the local (government) level.

Horizontally, Jirga plays many different roles including those of executive, legislature, and judiciary, all without much distinction in name.

At interpersonal and community levels, Jirga operates as a lubricant for the fragile tribal social setup, binding the Pukhtoons in one social fabric known as Pukhtoonwali. It is very much wrapped up in the meaning Pukhtoons give to their life and it enables them to go on. Jirga’s specialization of dispute resolution has been especially highlighted because of the enormous richness and indigenous nature of the processes adopted for peacebuilding.

The work is comprised of the perceptions and understandings of the people regarding their history and the value they attach to it. It also discusses the possible reasons for the special value of this sparsely recorded history. The context of Pukhtoon worldview is further defined through exploring the code of Pukhtoonwali—the basic framework of the Pukhtoon social system.

On our way, an attempt has been made to explore the future prospects for Jirga. We examine the possibilities of using Jirga in the forthcoming local government system, which is under design for the tribal areas of Pakistan. We consider the institutionalization of Jirga at the national level in Afghanistan and also how the development sector can partner with the tribal and rural Jirga.