Pakistan’s democratic order needs to efficiently evolve to a stage where briefings by Army chiefs become a normal and regular occurrence, the Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency (PILDAT) maintains in its latest report on civil-military relations. It further holds that such briefings should normally be held at the level of parliamentary committees, and not to joint sessions or an entire House of the Parliament. The report was shared with the media on Wednesday. Commenting on COAS’s address at the Senate Committee of the Whole on December 19, 2017, the PILDAT report said that the briefing was a good development, but it also brought home the stark reality that the oversight of agencies responsible for national defence by elected representatives was still a far cry from the normal status it had acquired in developed democracies. “Such appearances are common and usual occurrence in democracies such as UK and next-door India where heads and representatives of respective defence forces regularly appear before their relevant parliamentary committees to both brief them and answer their questions,” the report said. The report also commented on Defence Minister Khurram Dastgir Khan’s recent statement that he was only a facilitator, not the boss of Pakistani defence organisations. “The defence minister made highly significant pronouncements on civil-military relations and the role of his ministry. PILDAT analyses that this is a sensitive and serious matter, seldom discussed in the open by a sitting Defence Minister in the past and leading the country to an almost definitive but the discomforting conclusion that CMR may be moving towards an era of ‘open warfare’. No country can allow such tensions between state institutions or between popular political parties and the security establishment, especially given the prevailing tense relations with a superpower and some neighbouring countries. “In an awkward though familiar pattern, after the meeting, various quotes and information from the session flashed on the media, thus proving the age-old wariness of the security leadership towards politicians that they cannot be trusted with sensitive national security information. While it is important for the security establishment to know that it has to answer questions asked by the Parliament and its committees, a relationship based on mutual trust also has to be cultivated. It’s, therefore, commendable that Senator Rabbani has taken the leaks from the in-camera session seriously and has referred the matter to the House Business Advisory Committee for probe.” On ISPR director general’s statement of December 24th in response to Railways Minister Khawaja Saad Rafique’s earlier comments, the PILDAT report said that the ISPR DG’s statement seemed to imply that, firstly, the Army, and not the citizens of the republic, were supreme, when in fact it is the citizenry to whom the institutions serve. “The statement seemed to imply that the rule of law and Constitution is not necessarily applicable to the Army and in being ‘determined and confident’ to stay within the bounds of the Constitution, the Army is indeed being courteous to rule of law,” the report said. At the 206th Corps Commanders’ Conference held on December 5, the report observed, the COAS had taken the top military brass on-board on his ;military diplomacy’ in his recent international visits, as well as interactions with foreign dignitaries. “The forum also discussed internal and external security situation with special reference to Afghanistan. Operational review of Operation Raddul Fasaad, as well as Khushal Balochistan programme, launched to improve stability in Balochistan through security and socio-economic development.” The PILDAT commented that Army chiefs’ role in Pakistan’s foreign relations was growing, noting that visits and interactions often take place in the absence of representatives of the Foreign Office. “This is contrary to the norms of democratic governance. Military diplomacy is a notion that is not in sync with the Constitution and democratic governance in Pakistan.”