The government of Pakistan has decided to change its modus operandi against the proscribed organisation as the state authorities have seized various properties – both moveable and immoveable – of Jamaat-u-Dawa (JuD). The recent steps that the government has taken are a shift from its past actions. Much of the action that the state has recently taken against JuD is ‘final’ instead of the usual cycle of arrests, legal hearings and proceedings and eventual bails to the members and founder of JuD.

The government has taken a commendable step by permanently taking over the assets and shifting the management of one of the proscribed organisations to the government officials. The move to re-purpose ambulances of Falah-e-Insaaniyat Foundation (FIF) for the operations of Rescue 1122 is a case in point. The action against JuD was much needed as the country has been facing mounting international pressure for quite some time.

The steps of the state indeed need appreciation, for the recent actions against JuD are stronger and more stringent steps than before. The recent moves of the government against the organisation will hamper its operational ability and reach. And if the state does not return the assets to the organisation, then no one can claim that the seizure of properties and taking control of the different institution of JuD is an eyewash – not even hostile powers with a stake in the matter. 

However, the government taking over all the activities and institutions of the JuD will be a time-consuming activity. Despite being a slow work, the state needs to complete it swiftly and need not abandon it halfway. Once action against JuD completes, the authorities need to focus on neutralising other proscribed organisations in the same manner.

However, taking such actions are only a half solution to the issue in hands. At the same time, the state needs to devise a long-term strategy to deconstruct their ideology. If the ideology is not dismantled, a mere seizing of the assets of these proscribed organisations or arrests of their leaders will not stop the resurrection of such organisations. The state should give this proposition a serious consideration.

The action of the government - confiscating what essentially is private property and the subsequent move of transferring its permanent control to state authorities - on the basis of enough actionable evidence, raises another question: Will the government take further action, perhaps legal, against individuals associated with these organisations as well?