It is much safer to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both. Niccolo Machiavelli

There is an intriguing coincidence at the very beginning of the story of the Frontier Crimes Regulation. In 1872, the same year in which Lord Mayo, the Viceroy of India, was assassinated by Sher Ali Afridi, the British introduced the first Frontier Crimes Regulation. The two events were not causally connected, and it would be misleading to suggest otherwise. Yet the coincidence captures the atmosphere in which the British were trying to govern India's north-western frontier: a region they regarded as volatile, fiercely independent and resistant to the ordinary machinery of colonial law.

The British had already learnt that the Frontier could not easily be governed like the settled plains of India. Tribal loyalties were powerful, customary law was deeply rooted, and the authority of the jirga and tribal elders often carried greater weight than that of a distant magistrate. Conventional courts depended upon witnesses willing to testify, documentary evidence and elaborate procedures. In a society where tribal solidarity could make witnesses reluctant to appear, and where disputes could trigger cycles of retaliation, the British considered such machinery impractical.

The FCR therefore did not emerge fully formed in 1872. It evolved through successive experiments in frontier administration. The early regulation was followed by revisions, including the Punjab Frontier Crimes Regulation of 1887. British officials........

© The Express Tribune