Hafiz Saeed Is Convicted. What Now?

An anti-terrorism court in Pakistan convicted Hafiz Saeed, the head of Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), and sentenced him to 11 years in prison for financing and leading terrorist operations. It’s important to note that this is the first time that Saeed has been convicted in any case in Pakistan.

For a long time, Saeed had been accused of setting up terror networks to target India’s interests in the region. His role as leader of Lashkar-e-Taiba at the time of the the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks and a number of other operations in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir is well known.

For years, New Delhi demanded action against Saeed, seeing him as one of the greatest threats to its security interests. However, Pakistan refused to take action on India’s behest and JuD long operated freely in Pakistan.

While the conviction is an encouraging first step toward holding Saeed and his group accountable, the timing of the conviction and Pakistan’s erstwhile policy on implementing such verdicts raise a number of questions about the value of this development for the broader fight against extremism in the country.

It’s unclear why Saeed’s conviction took such a long time when all the evidence of his involvement in financing terror operations was public knowledge in Pakistan and elsewhere. One of the reasons that Pakistan may have kept Saeed safe is due to the country’s policy of deploying groups such as JuD to justify its regional security policy.

Arguably, for Pakistan’s part, the conviction, which is being cited as historic, is nothing more than a transparent attempt to cover a legal requirement. It's unlikely that Saeed will be actually punished or that his group will be disbanded in the country. It’s possible that Pakistan has only acted in haste as the country’s case at the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), where it is likely to remain on the grey list, appears to be in bad shape.

The FATF is investigating Pakistan for offering an enabling environment for militant groups to proliferate their activities, including allowing them to also set up deep financial structures in the country. The forum has threatened action if Islamabad doesn’t take serious steps to plug the existing loopholes in its counterterrorism efforts. This realization has been one of the key worries for Pakistan’s leaders over the last few months as the forum has rejected Islamabad’s cosmetic steps to fill the existing gaps in its counterterrorism efforts.

It’s possible that Islamabad was told by its friends and allies, such as China, that Pakistan’s position is going to be thrashed at the FATF if it doesn’t finally take action against the likes of Saeed. The conviction certainly offers Pakistan an important source of legal cover as far as the country’s case at the FATF is concerned. However, what should be troubling for Pakistan is this: What if the forum asks the country about additional steps that Islamabad is taking to dismantle JuD’s infrastructure, now that the country’s courts have convicted its chief?

In Pakistan, a conviction from court doesn’t mean anything unless the state, particularly the country’s security establishment, is ready to back such an outcome. In Saeed’s case, unless the Pakistani state has changed its counterterrorism policy and is ready to take on all groups, including the ones that target India’s interests, the conviction doesn’t carry much value.

“I believe that this time Saeed will remain locked up,” says Claude Rakisits, who is an analyst of South Asian security affairs. “But Pakistan will need to lock up more high-profile terrorist leaders of this ilk before the world will be convinced the country has indeed changed its spots,” he adds, identifying the importance of follow-up.

Of course, much of this will become clear in the coming weeks as Pakistan is readying for another tough hearing at the FATF. Pakistan has “done enough to avoid getting blacklisted. Getting off the graylist, however, won’t be easy,” said Michael Kugelman of the Wilson Center. “Pakistan has taken several steps to rein in terrorist financing, but few of them that can be classified as irreversible,” he adds.

While it’s unlikely that Pakistan will get off the forum’s grey list, the FATF may ask the country to implement a broad agenda in terms of tackling Saeed and his group’s network in its entirety.

If this happens, Islamabad would be in a troubling situation as it’s unlikely that it has the capacity or will to take on JuD’s infrastructure in Pakistan. Undeniably, the group remains popular on the grassroots levels and has serious organizational capacity in the country’s most populated province, Punjab. It seems the conviction of Saeed has become possible on legal grounds due to the FATF’s growing pressure on the country. However, the conviction may backfire for Pakistan in the medium to long run if the country doesn’t follow through with an action plan against JuD.

Pakistan has no option but to take real action against Saeed and his militant organization.