This article was published in Dawn News on July 18, 2026, at the following link

https://www.dawn.com/news/2016395/eternal-quest-for-privileges

THERE are multiple reasons for serious concern about the recent passage of the Powers, Immunities and Privileges Act, 2026, (Act VII of 2026) by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly. The first concern is the lack of transparency about the details of the Act. Although the law was passed by the assembly on April 30, 2026 and assented to by the governor on May 6, it took a while for the text of the law to make it to the assembly’s website. Interestingly, the website showed texts of acts passed much later but this particular Act and two other similar ones (Acts VIII and IX) were not there, presumably because of anticipated public backlash.

Some of the privileges and powers among the long list of at least 21 privileges in the Act raise serious questions. Many of these privileges were a part of the repealed Act of 1988, but several new ones are included in the 2026 law.

Section 4 of the law exempts MPAs from attending court proceedings during the assembly or committee sittings. The courts have been advised to reschedule hearings or grant adjournments to suit the assembly or committee schedule. Given the present huge backlog of pending court cases, this privilege is certainly not going to help the efficient disposal of cases.

Section 5 provides that if the assembly or committee summons an MPA who has been arrested or detained on a criminal charge, the court, if the offence is not punishable with death or life imprisonment, shall release such MPA on his personal bond to enable him to attend the session or meeting.

Section 8 empowers MPAs to summon meetings within their constituencies where attendance of every district government officer has been made mandatory. If a government officer fails to attend without sufficient cause, he shall be deemed to have committed a breach of privilege. Since most districts have multiple constituencies, it may pose a serious practical challenge for district officers to be present at constituency meetings. The law would certainly add to the travel and workload of district officers and may blur the division between the legislature and executive.

Section 12 entitles members to ‘Category B security’ which means that one head constable and two constables would be deputed with each member. The security can be upgraded to Category A requiring deputation of one head constable and four constables. Apparently, the security detail may have to be provided a vehicle with attendant fuel and maintenance. The extension of this facility, available to each member for the entire term and throughout Pakistan, seems to be an overkill and will certainly have serious financial implications.

Section 13 lists a number of additional privileges such as free accommodation in every circuit house, rest house, or other government accommodation for three days; grants eight arms licences for non-prohibited bore weapons and exempts MPAs from the payment of toll taxes.

The MPAs can visit jails, government hospitals, educational institutions, any public office or a project site in order to check their performance. This provision may again blur the boundaries of the executive and legislature.

MPAs can use VIP lounges at all domestic airports, avail clubs’ membership and may have tinted or darkened glass on personal vehicles. The assembly will issue an identity card for the member’s spouse to which “all law enforcement agencies shall extend due regard”.

A controversial privilege extended under the new law is the issuance of the official (blue) passport to members and their spouses for life. This is irrespective of whether the member and his/her spouse have any official business on the trip or not. Extending the privilege for life appears unreasonable. The KP Assembly is not alone in this quest for privileges. On July 10, the Senate Committee on Interior unanimously approved the Members of Parliament Salaries and Allowances (Amendment) Bill, 2026, which allows former parliamentarians, their spouses, and dependent children under 28 years to receive official blue passports. The amendment makes little sense as official passports should be issued strictly for official travel only and not be treated as a privilege.

Another set of privileges in the KP law may have serious implications for media freedom. Section 27 empowers the Speaker to prohibit the publication of assembly proceedings of any day. Section 28 bars the media from publishing or disseminating a report of assembly proceedings unless it is “fair and correct”. The law also provides that no media should publish or disseminate any “malicious, false, defamatory or derogatory statement or comments concerning assembly proceedings or any member’s conduct in such proceedings”.

Section 33 gives exclusive jurisdiction to the assembly or its judicial committee to try offences and award punishments for the offences punishable under the Act. The sentence awarded by the committee shall be executed by a judicial magistrate as if the same were a sentence awarded by him. Won’t this provision amount to intrusion into the judiciary’s turf?

A schedule in the law prescribes punishment for breaching 27 categories of privileges. For example, the maximum punishment for “willfully publishing any false or perverted report of any debate or proceedings of the assembly or any committee or willfully misrepresenting any speech made by a member before the assembly or any committee” is imprisonment for a maximum of three months or a Rs300,000 fine or both. Creating or joining in any disturbance in the chamber or in a committee or in the assembly precincts while the House or committee is sitting may lead to imprisonment for up to six months or a fine of one million rupees or both. It is not clear whether this provision extends to the MPAs too who usually are part of the disturbance.

Apparently, the law extends too many privileges to members and prescribes punishments too harsh for ‘breach of privileges’, especially for reporting assembly or committee proceedings. Following the media’s protest, the KP government has announced the reconsideration of the law but it raises serious questions about the judgement of the government and the legislators who introduced and passed the law in the first place.