Intelligence Agencies in Iraqi Kurdistan are Political Police of KDP and PUK
Lahur Sheikh Jangi Talabani (R), the head of Intelligence Agency in the areas controlled by Patriotic Union of Iraqi Kurdistan PUK and Masrour Barzani, the head of the Kurdish intelligence agency in KDP-controlled areas of Iraqi Kurdistan, 2017. Photo: Ekurd.net/AUIS/FB
Araz Barwari | Exclusive to Ekurd.net
In the developing countries such as Iraq where young democracies try to establish intelligence agencies that respect democracy and the rule of law, they face challenge with many issues that hinder the formation of such an intelligence agency for their state. In such countries, Intelligent agency officers might argue that for their work to be effective, they need to have as much secrecy as they can regardless of transparency.
As different forces of the States try to find the best solution for this dilemma between an effective and a transparent intelligent agency, they face many problems such as accountability, corruption, and partisanship in their intelligence community. However, accountability is the most pressing problem young and vulnerable democracies face in trying to transform their intelligence agencies from a political police agency into a law-abiding and transparent bureau of intelligence, because accountability requires an effective bureaucratic system and respect for rule of law, which takes honesty, hard work and commitment to develop.
It is important to understand the difference between “political police” and “bureau of intelligence. Political police usually serves the interests of the political parties they belong to, within the government, rather than the interests of the whole people and state. It is a tool that authoritarian governments use in order to gain political, economic and financial advantages and maintain their grip on power. In these kinds of states, intelligence agencies are not transparent. They use blackmailing and coercion on their own people in order to advance their own political party agendas, personal interests and government policies.
An example of political police intelligent agency is the security intelligence agency of Parasten, Zanyari and Asayish of Kurdistan Regional government in Iraq. These agencies which are dominated by members of only two political parties, Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), and Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) misuse their power to secure the interests of their own political parties. There have been cases that the agents of these intelligent agencies have assaulted, arrested journalists, protesters and members of opposition political parties. They have also used employment security clearance as a tool to deny employment opportunities in public sector for many people who stand in the opposition parties, and for people who accuse and criticize their political parties of corruption and human right abuse. This controlling tool is also used to make people vote for their own political parties in return for employment.
As far as law concerns employment decisions relating to security clearances should not be based on political affiliation, malice or blackmail ground. Employment decision should not be made only on the bases of a biased security government agency decision that is dominated by members of only one or two political parties. However, a bureau of intelligence, respects democratic values and the rule of law by operating within the legal established boundaries regardless of political affiliation to a party.
In such an undemocratic environment, where government institutions are under the control of only one or two parties, intelligence services are usually free to carry out many unlawful practices such as corruption, coercion and blackmailing and human right abuse. The oversight mechanisms are too weak or politicized to hold the intelligence services accountable for their unlawful practices. As the ruling political parties try to maximize their power and repress any opposition, intelligence agencies become indispensable tools in achieving this objective. In fact, when different forces try to establish democratic institutions, intelligence agencies might resist democratization and change. Because democratization means more transparency and accountability for intelligence practices, intelligence agencies will be unwilling to give up their advantageous position, which allows them to operate with impunity.
Getting the intelligence community respect the rule of law takes hard work and commitment, which require behavioral, attitudinal, and constitutional acceptance of democratic values. Accountability also requires an effective bureaucratic system that prevents unlawful practices through effective oversight mechanisms. State bureaucracy and the rule of law go hand in hand. The state must have institutions that uphold and carry out the rule of law. These institutions enable the government to carry out its policies and the intelligence agencies to carry out their operations according to the laws.
State bureaucracy such as the legislative and independent judicial branches of the government includes institutions that keep the power of the intelligence agencies in check. Legislative branch and even a Civilian Council can monitor intelligence activities through the committees in the parliament. It can also influence these agencies through budget control. Judicial branch can keep the intelligence agencies in check by trying the intelligence personnel who overstep the limits of their power and violate the laws. Effective state bureaucracy can limit the power of the intelligence agencies and ensure that the community is upholding the rule of law.
Having a Civilian Council on the side of other government institution, can be of great help in monitoring the legality of the work of security agencies, by monitoring and overseeing application of measures for confidential data gathering which limits constitutionally-guaranteed human rights and fundamental freedoms. The Council can also provide information about methods on how citizens, governmental bodies and legal persons may file complaints on observed illegal or irregular procedures in the work of security and intelligence agencies, particularly in cases of violation of constitutionally-guaranteed human rights and fundamental freedoms”. The role of intelligence agencies is influential in consolidation of democracy. If the intelligence power is not checked with laws and oversight mechanisms, it could be a substantial block in front of democracy.
Democracy and prosperity flourished in Europe mostly because European countries have created an effective state bureaucracy and enforced the rule of law. However, Kurdistan regional government (KRG) has not been successful yet at limiting the power of its intelligence community through effective oversight mechanisms. The (KRG) intelligence services have a party political affiliation, they have interfered in domestic politics, and there is insufficient transparency, very weak oversight to the intelligence community. The inspector-general for intelligence is not performing adequately at all. The general problem is that our intelligence services do not have a culture of respect for the Constitution and respect for the law and therefore one hope that this is the primary focus and task of the new KRG Parliament, President and Prime Minster to work on reforming the intelligent agencies of KRG government.
Araz Barwari is a law student at the University of Nawroz in Kurdistan of Iraq.
The opinions are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of Ekurd.net or its editors.
Copyright © 2019 Ekurd.net. All rights reserved
Comments