Peshawar:: The proposed Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Police Act 2026 has triggered a fresh and potentially far-reaching debate over the independence of the provincial police force, with legal and policing experts warn that the legislation could place key operational decisions under greater political control and reverse safeguards introduced to insulate policing from political interference.
The controversy has assumed particular significance because the proposed legislation comes only months after the Peshawar High Court struck down provisions of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Police (Amendment) Act 2024 that required the Chief Minister’s approval for postings of senior police officers and curtailed the authority of the provincial police officer to appoint field commanders.
In its February 2026 judgment, the high court held that such interventions undermined the operational autonomy of a professional police service and emphasized that day-to-day administration, including postings and transfers, must remain within the professional police command rather than becoming subject to political expediency.
Against that legal backdrop, legal and police experts said several provisions of the proposed 2026 law raise serious questions about whether the province is once again moving towards a system in which the political executive would have a decisive say in the police chain of command and will the propose law not bring police under political authorities besides undermining counter terrorism operations.
On Wednesday, the KP Cabinet approved the revised draft in its meeting chaired by Chief Minister Muhammad Sohail Afridi. Provincial Information Minister Shafi Jan said the draft had been amended after consideration of reservations raised by cabinet members and recommendations of a subcommittee that, according to him, consulted police authorities.
He said the approved draft is to be placed before the provincial assembly for legislative consideration.
According to details reported about the approved draft, the proposed framework would give the provincial government and the Chief Minister a substantially greater role in the appointment, transfer and removal of senior police officers.
The draft reportedly provides that the provincial police officer’s operational, administrative and financial powers would be exercised subject to policy issued by the Police Policy Board (PPB) and directions of the government or Chief Minister.
It also provides a mechanism under which the government could seek the repatriation of the provincial police officer if dissatisfied with his performance and request another panel of senior officers from the federal government.
The experts argued that the issue is not simply who appoints the police chief, but who ultimately controls the chain of command when operational decisions become politically sensitive.
Former KP Inspector General of Police Syed Akhtar Ali Shah said the proposed legislation could politicise the police force and weaken its operational autonomy.
He argued that placing crucial decisions concerning the police command under the political executive could expose officers to enermous pressure and make it more difficult for them to act independently in accordance with law and operational requirements.
“The police cannot be professionally independent if its command knows that its most important postings, transfers and career decisions ultimately depend on political approval,” Akhtar Ali Shah said, arguing that such a structure could weaken command discipline and undermine officers’ confidence to take difficult decisions.
The concern becomes even more serious in a province where police officers remain on the front-line of counter-terrorism operations, he added.
The former IGP questioned the timing and priorities of the proposed legislation, arguing that the provincial government should instead be concentrating on strengthening the Counter Terrorism Department (CTD), modernising police equipment, improving intelligence capabilities and providing personnel with adequate weapons, armoured vehicles and protective equipment in the wake of recent terrorists attacks on police referring to Kohat’s suicide and guns attack.
The central question, he said, should be whether police commanders can make rapid operational decisions based on security assessments quickly rather than whether political authorities have greater influence over postings and transfers.
KP police have for years operated under exceptionally difficult security conditions, making the independence and coherence of the operational chain of command particularly consequential.
The proposed restructuring, he feared , could create a situation in which a district police officer must look upward not only to the professional police hierarchy but also to political authorities when dealing with sensitive postings, demonstrations, security operations and other contentious matters.
Akhtar Ali Shah said one of the most contentious aspects of the draft concerns postings and transfers of senior field officers.
According to the reported provisions, appointments of officers at the levels of Regional Police Officer, District Police Officer, SP, SSP and Additional IG would require the Chief Minister’s approval, while the Establishment Department would issue the relevant notifications.
Transfers of DSPs and ASPs would fall under the authority of the Home Secretary.
This has raised fears among critics that the professional chain of command could be weakened at precisely the level where police decisions have the most direct impact on citizens.
A DPO who knows that his continuation in a district can depend upon political approval may face a difficult institutional dilemma whether to follow professional policing priorities or anticipate the preferences of those who have influence over his posting that will ultimately cast shadows over law and order situation in the district.
That is the fundamental concern being raised by opponents of the draft. The Peshawar High Court’s February judgment is particularly relevant in this context. The court struck down the 2024 provisions requiring Chief Minister approval for postings of BPS-18 and above and restored powers of the provincial police officer to post senior field officers.
Senior lawyer Malik Ashfaq said the court observed that executive superintendence could involve broad policy direction and oversight, but that day-to-day administration of the force including postings, transfers and internal management needed to remain with the professional police command to preserve discipline and an effective chain of command.
He said the controversy also centres on the stated philosophy of the KP Police Act 2017 that provided administrative and financial autonomy to the police and identifies its pillars as an apolitical, professional, accountable, transparent, autonomous and community-based police force.
The original Act itself stated that the objective was to make the police apolitical and accountable through democratic institutions and civilian oversight while providing operational, administrative and financial autonomy to the force.
He therefore saw the proposed 2026 legislation was not merely as an administrative adjustment but a potential reversal of institutional philosophy behind the 2017 police reforms.
He argued that civilian oversight and political control are not synonymous, adding the KP government should determine broad public policy and remain constitutionally accountable, but operational policing requires a professional chain of command capable of acting according to law without fear of arbitrary transfer or removal.
The proposed changes have also raised serious questions about the independence of police oversight mechanisms. The draft reportedly gives the provincial government a role in nominating seven independent members of the Public Safety Commission (PSC) as well as the chairman and members of the Regional Police Complaints Authority (RPCA).
Legal experts argued that an oversight body cannot be fully credible if the executive branch being scrutinised has decisive influence over the appointment of those responsible for that scrutiny.
The concern is straightforward that who will hold the police accountable if the same political authority has substantial influence over the appointment of police leadership and the bodies tasked with oversight?
Akhtar Ali Shah said effective accountability requires both civilian oversight and institutional independence, removing one in the name of strengthening the other could weaken the entire police system and will affect public confidence.
He said the draft also proposes changes to the Dispute Resolution Council (DRC) system, established in 2015 to provide a mechanism for resolving disputes between citizens and police.
Information Minister Shafi Jan has claimed the new legislation would provide a clearer and more comprehensive legal framework for DRCs and that existing councils would be dissolved and reconstituted under the new law.
The provisions concerning no-objection certificates for public rallies and demonstrations have also attracted experts attention because policing public gatherings sits at the intersection of public order, fundamental rights and political activity.
Critics argued that decisions concerning demonstrations must remain governed by law and objective security considerations rather than becoming vulnerable to political calculations.
Hamaza Khan, PML-N Nowshera president, strongly criticised the proposed legislation, describing it as a serious blow to professional police independence.
He warned that weakening police operational autonomy in a province confronting terrorism could have negative consequences extending far beyond internal administration.
“The KP police are a frontline force in the war against terrorism. Turning their command structure into an extension of political decision-making can down morale and compromise the ability of officers to act decisively,” he said.
Hamza Khan argued that replacing the professional authority of the police leadership with political control could gradually transform policing from a public service governed primarily by law into an institution increasingly responsive to the priorities of the government of the day.
Lawyer Malik Ashfaq also questioned the legal implications of the proposed changes, arguing that some provisions could conflict with the principles laid down by the superior courts regarding political interference in public appointments and policing.
His argument carries added significance following the Peshawar High Court’s February 2026 judgment, which declared the 2024 amendments relating to senior police postings unconstitutional and restored key elements of police autonomy.
If the new legislation again places political approval at the centre of senior police appointments and operational administration, legal experts are likely to scrutinise whether the new framework adequately addresses the constitutional concerns already identified by the court.
The proposed law has therefore created an unusual situation regarding a provincial government preparing to legislate on police powers only months after the province’s high court struck down an earlier attempt to increase political control over those very powers.
The provincial government has presented the proposed legislation in terms of institutional accountability, clearer separation of policy and operations, and improved mechanisms for police postings and transfers.
Information Minister Shafi Jan claimed the proposed framework would establish separate Police Policy and Police Operations Boards, with the Chief Minister heading the former and the provincial police officer heading the latter. The police chief would prepare an annual policing plan for consideration by the Police Policy Board.
The government can therefore argued that the draft does not abolish professional policing but creates a formal distinction between political policy-making and police operations.
Police and legal experts, however, questioned how meaningful that distinction will be if the political executive retains decisive authority over the appointment and transfer of the police officers responsible for implementing those operations.
That is where the debate over the 2026 Act is likely to be decided whether a civilian government should exercise oversight over the police or where oversight ends and operational control begins.
The deeper issue is whether a police officer should understand his first institutional obligation as being subservient to the law and the professional chain of command, or to the political authority capable of determining his next posting without completing tenure.
For a province facing monster challenge of terrorism, various types of crimes, political unrest and serious public-order challenges, the proposed amendment are likely to be counter productive.
A police force needs accountability and operational independence without becoming politically dependent, and it also requires professional command to bring offenders under the law.
The draft has yet to complete the legislative process and could still be amended by the provincial assembly. The critics argued that if political authority over appointments, transfers and policy becomes too extensive, the legislation could undermine the very professional independence that effective policing particularly counterterrorism policing requires.
The coming debate in the KP Assembly will therefore be about much more than a new police law. It will determine how far political power can reach into the operational command of the province’s police force and where the amended law draws the line between virtues and darkness.