The amendments added a new provision, Section 26(A), to PECA. This addition is aimed at penalizing those responsible for spreading “fake news” online.

When PECA was first introduced in 2015 as a bill in the National Assembly, PPP, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) and the Awami National Party (ANP), allied with civil society and the press to resist the law. But once it arrived in the Senate where the opposition enjoyed a majority, the PPP made claims of “enough debate,” “it’s the need of the hour” and “we’ve fixed it” — which they hadn’t.

PECA was used against the PML-N, PTI, and PPP when they fell out of favor with the military establishment. Yet, this has not deterred any political party from being a vessel of further oppression when in power by expanding the scope of the law.  

This time around, the PPP supported the amendments in the National Assembly.

When the amendments were tabled in the Senate for passage, journalists staged a walkout. PPP Senator Sherry Rehman visited them and assured them their amendments would be supported just as the law was being passed with the party’s blessing in the Senate, receiving the assent of President Asif Zardari (the PPP’s co-chairman) soon after.

Once the law was signed, a member of the PPP reached out to us for input to prepare amendments. There was no offer for such input prior to the enactment of the law, but once it was all finalized thanks to their parliamentarians, they felt the need to hold “discussions.”

When the PPP was in opposition and its members headed National Assembly and Senate standing committees, they called upon digital rights advocates and journalists to brief them on the misuse of PECA. Yet at no point in all these years did the party or its members move a bill to roll back the damage PECA has done. Instead, for short-term gain and favor, they decided to rubber-stamp these amendments. 

The PPP certainly takes the cake in the art of deception and playing both sides. But it is also incumbent upon civil society and journalists to wisen up and see through these charades.

During advocacy against PECA back in 2015, consistent reminders were served to then allies in civil society, reminding them that despite flowery speeches, come time to vote we knew which way they swung: Pakistan Protection Act and the 21st amendment were recent debacles. This time it was the 26th amendment and PECA 2.0.

The amendments are a nefariously designed systemic assault on fundamental freedoms by expanding the state’s stranglehold over speech and information. This has not been whipped out of thin air; rather, its Machiavellian design is evident in the very deliberate and considered way granular changes have been introduced, to reverse years of judicial checks applied to misuse of the law’s provisions. There is a method to this madness.

These amendments close the door on the ability to seek relief based on misuse of the law, because it’s the very abuse of process that was challenged before courts and led to judicial pronouncements that has been legalized, so to speak. 

Cases were quashed by courts for not fulfilling the basic requirements of the law. For instance, journalist Shahzeb Jillani’s case was discharged recognizing that institutions or third parties on their behalf could not be complainants but that a “natural person” who was directly aggrieved had to be.

So conveniently, the amendments alter the definition of person to include legal and corporate entities paving the way for “institutions” and a complainant is now anyone who “has substantial reasons to believe that the offence has been committed.”

“PECA was used against the PML-N, PTI, and PPP when they fell out of favor with the military establishment. Yet, this has not deterred any political party from being a vessel of further oppression when in power by expanding the scope of the law.”

Not as though this was not already happening in practice. The case against journalist Bilal Farooqi, which is still pending, was on the complaint of a factory worker in Karachi who happened to stumble upon his social media posts and reported them. 

The way the law works in practice is that a person is identified as the target first. What they said or did not say, and whether it fits the offence or not, is an afterthought and semantics.

Once a complaint is filed, whether by issuing summons or registering an FIR, typically raids are conducted, attempts are made to arrest the person and seize their devices. Once arrested, there is a push for physical remand. Even where there is no arrest, appearance at every hearing is required.

Whether the offence is made out or not and whether procedures were followed or not, are things raised at later stages, once the damage is already done. An example of this is Asad Ali Toor’s arrest in February 2024, when after his arrest and 20-day incarceration, the court ultimately pronounced that the offence was never made out. By this time, the process was successfully used as punishment.

On the regulatory side, to counter checks against overreach, the amendments do away with the PTA, create a new regulatory authority that functions directly under the federal government and ensure its directives are “binding” upon it.

This is because under the earlier regulatory scheme, the IHC held that the federal government’s directives were not binding upon the PTA: X was banned upon a federal government notification.

Unfortunately, the courts did not prioritize petitions against the ban on the social platform X and the JIT and summons by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) in a timely manner. This gatekeeping further enabled the government to successfully weasel its way out of what would have been an obvious defeat in court by changing the rules of the game through altering the law.

Much of the resistance against PECA by journalist bodies today is stemming from being shunned after assurances by the government they would be taken into confidence. Too much is sacrificed at the altar of getting a seat at the table and eagerness to be co-opted.

There is nothing to “discuss.” No tweaks will prevent the persecution that this law enables. Nothing short of complete repeal should be accepted. These amendments are not just about press freedom; they have to do with the rights of every citizen of Pakistan.

Farieha Aziz

The writer is a co-founder of Bolo Bhi, an advocacy forum for digital rights and host of the Digi Pod on Dawn News English

The post How The PPP Played Both Sides While Passing The Draconian PECA Amendments appeared first on Dissent Today.

Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) had supported the legislation, but its own leader, Raza Rabbani, has come out against the bill. He issued a statement on Friday, saying, “This bill will further undermine freedom of expression by establishing authorities that operate under executive control.”

The controversial bill suggests adding a new provision, Section 26(A), to the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA). This addition is aimed at penalizing those responsible for spreading “fake news” online.

It states: “Anyone who intentionally distributes, publicly displays, or transmits information through any information system that they know or have reason to believe is false or misleading, and is likely to instill fear, panic, disorder, or unrest in the general public or society, shall face punishment of imprisonment for up to three years, a fine of up to Rs2 million, or both.”

Digital rights activists say it would be used to arbitarily clamp down on free expression on online platforms.

Rabbani said the bill would empower the executive not only to control the content of messages but also to regulate those who manage social media platforms.

“Joint Investigation Teams including members of unnamed intelligence agencies will be formed to watch over journalists, social media and the general public,” he warned.

Rabbani stated the government failed to take the relevant stakeholders in confidence before the passage of the bill. “In fact, it breached its commitments with various elected journalist bodies for consultation,” he said in the statement.

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post PPP Leader Says PECA Amendments Will Undermine Freedom of Expression appeared first on Dissent Today.

On May 9, former prime minister Imran Khan was arrested from within the premises of Islamabad High Court (IHC) by rangers over corruption charges. The arrest sparked nationwide protests by PTI supporters, who attacked military and civil properties. The Corps Commander Lahore residence and Pakistan Army headquarters in Rawalpindi were attacked by the protesters.

The government is running a media campaign expressing solidarity with the armed forces, and condemning the attacks on military and civil properties by the PTI supporters.

Leaders from ruling coalition parties, including Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) have shared a number of videos with the caption “Say No To 9th May”.

The campaign “Say No To 9th May” is also being run on state tv PTV.

#SayNoTo9May pic.twitter.com/3pbYGL7Ww5

— SenatorSherryRehman (@sherryrehman) May 20, 2023

Following the protests, the government and top military brass vowed strict action against those involved in attacking military installations. The army has also decided to hold trials of the PTI supporters involved in the attacks under the Army Act, drawing severe condemnation from the human rights quarters.

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post Amid Economic Crisis, Govt Runs Pro-Army Campaign On Media appeared first on Dissent Today.

At the previous hearing, the court had asked political parties to hold negotiations to end the impasse over the delay of elections. However, the ruling coalition criticised the top judiciary for “interfering in political matters” and refused to comply with the directives.

During today’s hearing, Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan told the court that the government and opposition had decided to hold a meeting on April 26, saying that Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz’s (PML-N) Ayaz Sadiq and Khawaja Saad Rafique met PTI’s Asad Qaiser on April 25. But Asad Qaiser refused to hold talks over the matter, saying he was not authorised.

Justice Bandial asked in what capacity was Senate Chairman Sadiq Sanjarani contacted to serve as a facilitator of the dialogue since he was neither the representative of the government nor the opposition.

“If the government was serious about negotiations, it would have made efforts itself,” said the CJP.

The top judge remarked that the court cannot force the government and opposition to hold negotiations, stressing that it only sought adherence to the Constitution and an end to the deadlock over the delay of elections.

During the hearing, PPP lawyer Farooq H. Naek told the court that the coalition parties had agreed to hold talks with PTI and Senate was the only forum where all political parties were present. He also made it clear that the Senate chairman was playing the role of a facilitator during the negotiations since he represents a political forum. He maintained that this is a political issue, which will only be decided by politicians.

The CJP had also called PTI’s Shah Mehmood Qureshi to the rostrum to present his party’s perspective during the hearing.

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post Court Can’t Force Dialogue Between Political Parties Over Elections, Says Chief Justice appeared first on Dissent Today.

Ayaz Ahmad Mahar went missing along with his driver on his way back from Karachi to his village, Chak, in Shikarpur district.

Naveed Ahmed Mahar, brother of Ayaz Ahmed Mahar, told BBC Urdu that his brother was on his way to native Chak in Shikarpur district from Karachi when unidentified men abducted him and his driver in the afternoon last week.

According to the police, no progress has been made so far in the case of alleged enforced disappearance of the PPP leader.

Ayaz Ahmed Mahar is the owner of the oil and gas extraction company ‘Unique Group’. Ayaz Mehr, 48, was nominated by the Pakistan People’s Party as a candidate for the general seat of the Senate in 2018.

He is also among the top taxpayers of the country.

Last week, a protest demonstration was also staged on Babarloi Bypass against the alleged enforced disappearance.

On April 1, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) social media activist had gone missing in Karachi after attending the party’s protest against enforced disappearances outside the Karachi Press Club.

Earlier, PTI Chairman Imran Khan’s focal person on social media, Azhar Mashwani, had returned home eight days after he reportedly went missing from Lahore.

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post PPP Leader Who Disappeared From Karachi Remains Missing After A Week appeared first on Dissent Today.

Senior Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leader Syed Qaim Ali Shah’s son Asad Ali Shah also took to Twitter and said that his father was among those who framed the 1973 constitution.

“As a signatory & member of the committee that drafted the constitution, he was invited to participate, but ironically not given the opportunity to speak & narrate the story,” he added.

1/ My father, Syed Qaim Ali Shah, the only person alive today from those who framed 1973 constitution.

As a signatory & member of committee that drafted the constitution, he was invited to participate, but ironically not given the opportunity to speak & narrate the story

⬇️ pic.twitter.com/GZa17Yknmz

— Asad Ali Shah (@Asad_Ashah) April 11, 2023

2/ Not many people realise the importance of passage of 1973 constitution by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto & his team through consensus of all parties.

This can only be appreciated from a historical perspective, as even the party which created 🇵🇰 could not make the constitution.

⬇️

— Asad Ali Shah (@Asad_Ashah) April 11, 2023

3/ The first Constituent Assembly could not make the constitution during its life until its controversial dissolution in 1954. The second Constituent Assembly, which made 1956 constitution, was created by the Order of Governor General of May 1955 and not elected by people

⬇️

— Asad Ali Shah (@Asad_Ashah) April 11, 2023

4/ Therefore, 1956 constitution was not a legitimate, as it was not made by representatives elected by people of Pakistan.

1962 constitution was made by General Ayub Khan for his personal rule.

⬇️

— Asad Ali Shah (@Asad_Ashah) April 11, 2023

5/ It was in the above background that the making of 1973 constitution, with consensus of all parties, needs to be seen.

Clearly, it was no less than a miracle to get consensus of opposition who were sworn enemies of Bhutto.

6/ A great lesson to be learned by political leaders of today from how, on matter of national importance, all parties came together to make a consensus constitution & sagacious leadership of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto

⬇️

— Asad Ali Shah (@Asad_Ashah) April 11, 2023

⬇️

— Asad Ali Shah (@Asad_Ashah) April 11, 2023

7/ Can our current leader ponder & learn from leadership of Mr. Bhutto and other leaders of 70s, especially how they achieved consensus on the most fundamental document, the constitution of Pakistan, despite severe differences in their views and ideologies?

7/7

— Asad Ali Shah (@Asad_Ashah) April 11, 2023

Another social media user also regretted that the senior PPP leader was not acknowledged.

Former CM Sindh Qaim Ali Shah who attended Golden Jubilee Celebrations of Constitution was not given the opportunity to address the ceremony at National Assembly. He’s the only person left who signed the 73 Constitution. Shah Sahab deserved acknowledgment in the occasion, sadly,… pic.twitter.com/2csbERLgma

— Fawad Zaidi (@fawadppp) April 11, 2023

“The only surviving framer of the Constitution should have been allowed to narrate circumstances and efforts that ultimately shaped the final draft of the 1973 Constitution,” another social media user said.

The only surviving framer of the Constitution should have been allowed to narrate circumstances and efforts that ultimately shaped the final draft of the 1973 Constitution. https://t.co/PsTA0D82Cr

— Nazeer Ahmed Arijo (@NazeerArijo) April 11, 2023

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post Netizens Question Why Politician Who Framed 1973 Constitution Not Given Chance To Address NA Golden Jubilee Convention  appeared first on Dissent Today.

The devolvement comes amid mainstream political parties increasingly using misogynistic slurs targeting opponents.

The PPP has appointed Shehryar Chaudhary for the position, according to a notification doing rounds on social media.

Social media users have commended PPP for removing Sariya Rana from her position.

Muneeb Qadir lauded PPP, saying “that is how you lead by example”.

He also added that misogyny cannot be normalised.

I feel immensely proud to have voted for PPP in the last election. Small steps such as these go a long way. Sariya Rana had written a misogynistic tweet against PTI female workers & she lost her position today. This is how you lead by example. WE CAN’T NORMALIZE MISOGYNY pic.twitter.com/gLIeQCbLpb

— Muneeb Qadir (@muneebqadirmmq) March 28, 2023

While applauding PPP for the move, Aurat March urged all political parties to invest in training members, while asking them to ensure that there is zero tolerance towards sexism.

A good step 🙌 taken by @PPP_Org in discouraging use of sexist slurs by party office bearers & leaders. We call on all political parties to invest in pol training of members; practice accountability from within & above; & practice zero tolerance towards sexism!#SexismInPolitics https://t.co/XaFPvcJxEA

— Aurat March – عورت مارچ (@AuratMarchKHI) March 29, 2023

Another social media user commended PPP for “sticking to the party’s ideology” by removing the office bearer.

I would like to thank PPP for leading by example and sticking to party’s ideology @BBhuttoZardari 🙏

Supporters of PTI, PMLN

Do better, call out your leadership, don’t accept dehumanising, sexist comments

Your argument, every party is same is lame, let’s all do better… https://t.co/dHbuWaPadB

— Q (@onelastdance01) March 28, 2023

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post ‘Leading By Example’: PPP Removes Office Bearer Who Posted Sexist Remarks Against PTI Activists appeared first on Dissent Today.

Pakistan stands not just on the brink of an economic disaster today but also faces an imminent meltdown of its state institutions. With each passing day, the Pakistani state looks increasingly dysfunctional. While there is an elected coalition government at the helm, the country appears rudderless. The parliament has been rendered ineffective and irrelevant by the largest opposition party, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) of former prime minister (PM) Imran Khan, staying out of the National Assembly.

Unwilling to enter a dialogue with the government, Imran Khan has been calling for fresh elections, since his ouster through a vote of no-confidence in April last year. The PTI chief had a very public falling out with his patron, the former Chief of Army Staff, General Qamar Javed Bajwa in November 2021, eventually leading up to Khan’s ouster. The rancor between the two has by leaps and bounds since, with Khan dragging General Bajwa over the coals daily. The President of Pakistan, Dr. Arif Alvi – a PTI partisan – has locked horns with the country’s Chief Elections Commissioner (CEC) over the dates for provincial elections that come due in the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and the Punjab provinces, after the PTI dissolved the two assemblies. After the president, the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SC) jumped into the fray over the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) dithering and ordered various authorities to fix the dates. But in the process, the SC, and especially the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP)  made a very controversial public spectacle of itself. Four SC judges openly dissociated themselves from the CJP, effectively expressing their distrust in how he is presiding over the highest court of the land. The development was highly unusual but not unprecedented. In 1997, a majority of SC judges had rebelled against the then CJP, albeit for different reasons.

What is unprecedented though are the palpable divisions in the army brass. The Pakistan army, arguably the most powerful entity in the country, has been an extremely disciplined outfit. Technically, a department of the ministry of defense, the army sees itself as an institution in the Pakistani state structure, which has always acted in unison to preserve its institutional interests. And for all practical purposes, the army is the chief and chief the army. While the decision-making is collective, the COAS is the face of the army’s unbridled power. But when the army decided upon the controlled demolition of its failed hybrid regime experiment, wherein it ruled jointly with Imran Khan, the brass, especially General Bajwa faced criticism from the officer class. In the end, the army went through with dismantling its Imran Khan project but in the process discovered itself to be a divided house. The incumbent COAS, General Syed Asim Munir, whose appointment Imran Khan had cast aspersions over, hasn’t been heard from much. While this could be him keeping in line with the army’s proclamation that it intends to remain neutral in the political matters or a more plausible scenario where the COAS hasn’t consolidated his authority.

Decades of army patronage have helped Imran Khan create not just a devoted public following but also a sizeable following within the civil bureaucracy, judiciary and, above all, the armed forces. The odious potion disparaging traditional politics and politicians, which the army had helped him peddle, was also consumed by its own. Capitalizing on his support in the army rank and file, Imran Khan has continued with his relentless assault on the former COAS Bajwa. Large sections of media, which previously parroted only the official army line, have sided with Imran Khan, drawing some notable but ineffective reprimand orchestrated by the current brass. And case after case, the superior judiciary, which has been the army’s handmaiden for the better part of the country’s existence, has given Imran Khan a kid glove treatment, indicating either a nod from a section of the brass or trying to chart its own course absent a directive from the army. Pakistan is, in effect, a house divided against itself. Add to this volatile mix a resurgence of the home-grown Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) terrorists, and disaster in near future is writ large.

Most, if not all, the factors contributing to the morass Pakistan finds itself in today, are of the army’s making over the past 65 years, and should be put into perspective, when looking for a way out. While Pakistan was founded on the basis of Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s Two-Nation Theory, as a country for the Muslims of India, not much else about the direction the new state would take was clear. Jinnah, who passed away after year of the country’s founding, was not much of a writer and didn’t leave any written treatise about the national, constitutional, and economic orientation of the nascent state. His thoughts and vision were expressed mostly in his speeches and correspondence. Jinnah’s actions and views – often self-contradictory — were meticulously archived by Jinnah and his associates, but have been interpreted, unsurprisingly, by his detractors and admirers according to their own political, religious or ideological leanings.

In the absence of a clear roadmap, this makes his legacy infinitely negotiable and thus problematic to derive legitimacy from. The debates in the first Constitutional Assembly clearly show that politicians such as Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, Ghaffar Khan and Bhupendra Kumar Datta et al had presciently called for the new state to be a pluralistic and progressive democratic federation of the diverse religio-ethno-national entities it included. Suhrawardy even warned that limiting trade ties with India and levying tariffs on exports would have dire economic consequences. But most importantly, he suggested replacing the Muslim League (ML) with what he called a Pakistan Nationalist League.

On the other hand, Jinnah’s close associates like the first PM Liaquat Ali Khan and scores of clergymen the founding father had gathered in his ML and in the assembly, proposed an Islamic identity for the state, and prevailed. But the bickering ML leaders, large numbers of whom had no electoral base in Pakistan, quickly lost political ground to a combination of the civil-military bureaucracy, out of which the army eventually prevailed.

After the partition of India, Pakistan inherited about one-third of its military and under one-fifth of its population and revenue sources. Being the largest organized entity in the new country’s chaotic polity, the army not only grabbed power in 1958 but also clearly enunciated its vision for the new state based on “Islamic ideology”. The military establishment anointed itself the guardian of not just the physical frontiers of Pakistan but also of the ‘ideological frontiers’ and smeared as anti-Islam and traitor, anyone who would challenge that notion. The usurper junta desperately needed a fortifying cement for the multi-ethnic state that would not just hold the various ethno-national entities in the two wings together but also legitimize and consolidate the military’s controlling position. The army made a conscious decision to transform Pakistan into an ideological, national security state as against a democratic, pluralist nation-state championed by politicians like Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, whom the military had toppled and disparaged. Field Marshal Ayub Khan codified, in writing that the supra-ethnic Pakistani identity was to be Islamic in ideology and anti-India in military orientation, while its economic model would be a quasi-market economy literally financed by the US and western aid. To peddle its version of nation-building without any opposition, the junta cracked down on both the free press and political opposition.

All militaries, however, are uniquely ill-trained professionally and intellectually to rule the complex civilian societies, multi-ethnic states and modern governments, and invariably fall back on civilian collaborators. Discussing this design flaw in the militaries world over, Samuel Finer points out in The Man on Horseback: the role of the military in politics, that “politically the armed forces suffer from two crippling weaknesses, which preclude them, save in exceptional cases and for brief periods of time, from running without civilian collaboration and openly in their own name … one weakness is the armed forces’ technical inability to administer any but the most primitive community. The second is their lack of legitimacy: that is to say their lack of moral title to rule”. And this has rung true in case of every army dictator who has ruled Pakistan.

After an initial rule purely by the junta, Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Ziaul Haq and Pervez Musharraf, all brought in a coterie of pliant civilians to run the government. Every single Pakistani dictator resorted to coercing and coopting the superior judiciary, introducing some aberration into the constitution and/or manipulating the parliament to give legitimacy to their rule. From elections heist to fraudulent presidential referenda, from sham devolution of governance to local bodies to raising or appropriating political parties, from martial law to presidential rule, and from a tutelary role to a hybrid regime, the army has tried every trick in the book cling on to power. And predictably the playbook has not changed one bit since the first martial law.

Decades of constant meddling in the political process, tampering with the constitution, and manipulation of the state institutions, however, has had catastrophic consequences. Perpetual political engineering by the army has not just stunted the natural evolution of the state institutions but has made them disfigured and dysfunctional. Visualizing the smaller nations like the Baloch, through the national security lens rather than an equitable rights-based approach, and consequently unleashing a dirty war on them has pushed them to alienation and militancy. Additionally, the army’s use of jihadist proxies to prosecute its warped foreign policy has had bloody domestic blowback in the form of groups like the TTP that have been unleashing terror at home for over a decade-and-a-half.

The military, which is also the country’s leading business enterprise, however, has a vested interest as an economic class that it seeks to secure and perpetuate. It benefits immensely from fomenting discord with Pakistan’s neighbors as that helps it not only retain its preeminent position as the arbiter of national interest and security but a direct beneficiary of the domestic defense budget allocations and foreign military aid.

Perpetual political engineering by the army has not just stunted the natural evolution of the state institutions but has made them disfigured and dysfunctional.

The national security state façade is built at the expense of economic growth and diverts resources from health, education and social welfare sectors and tramples upon civil liberties and provincial autonomy. But while the army would seek to preserve its powerful position in Pakistan’s polity, the virulent mutations it has introduced into the state structures over the past decades, and especially during its hybrid regime experiment with Imran Khan, have compounded exponentially. The rot in the organs of the state is deeper than anyone thought, and it has put their viability into question. A fundamental reason that had kept the army’s four martial law regimes and a near-uninterrupted tutelary status afloat was the largesse received primarily from the US as an ally during the Cold War and the so-called War on Terror, to a lesser extent from Saudi Arabia and Gulf Sheikhdoms for mercenary duties, and later on from China for serving as a client counterweight to India. With the windfall from all these patrons effectively drying out over the past several years, the ugliness of the praetorian ventures has been laid bare. The tiff between Imran Khan and General Bajwa came to light after their bickering over the appointment of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) director, but it truly had started over the country’s coffers drying up when the international gravy train came to a grinding halt.

The situation as it stands today is untenable. Pakistan looks down an economic and political abyss. Problems are myriad and solutions far and few between. It would take a herculean effort on part of the political parties to first come together to take stock and then bring the public at large, onboard to understand the gravity of the complex the crises the country is in. The political effort would have to be geared towards demanding of army to put its money where its mouth is. The army has proclaimed that it has decided to stay neutral and not meddle in the political affairs.

But that is not enough. Both the former army chief, General Bajwa and his ex-chief spook, Lt. General Faiz Hameed have confessed to violating the constitution and installing their blue-eyed boy Imran Khan in the high office. Before that, the duo had the orchestrated, in connivance with the superior judiciary, the disqualification of the erstwhile PM Nawaz Sharif on cooked-up corruption charges. In addition to that, their hands are smeared with the blood of the Baloch and illegal detentions of the Pashtun nationalists. The army could show the veracity of its words by bringing the two to book. The chances are, however, slim to none that anything of the sort would transpire. On the contrary, the army might actually go back on its word and consider an overt intervention if it decides that its institutional imperatives to preserve and perpetuate its preeminence demand such a drastic move.

Samuel Finer has discussed that a military putsch is generally a function of and an interplay between an army’s disposition to intervene vis-à-vis the opportunity existing on the ground for such intervention. Pakistan’s history has shown that its army has always maintained a relentless disposition and readiness to intervene. It has seized the opportunity when one popped up or manufactured one if none existed. The current political instability is reminiscent of the 1976-77 bitter feuding between the then PM Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and the opposition parties, which culminated in General Ziaul Haq taking full advantage of the chaos and imposing martial law. While the economic viability and international acceptance of a martial law regime today would be questionable and make such intervention less likely, it might serve to consolidate the incumbent COAS’ rather precarious position within the brass and rally the army behind him. Another wild card is the judiciary, which while appearing to side with Imran Khan currently, may eventually cast its lot with the army when push comes to shove.

The politicians, especially those in the coalition, have to put their house in order to preempt and stymie any adventurism. To bring Pakistan back from the brink requires a political will and capacity of the Himalayan proportions, which the incumbent civilian dispensation seems to lack. It would, however, behoove them to at least try to build a consensus for a new charter of democracy that calls for holding the previous putschists and their collaborators among the judiciary, bureaucracy, and politicians accountable.

There are already calls from the senior coalition partner Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) to court-martial the former ISI chief, General Faiz Hameed, and proceeding against the complicit judges. But as General Hameed has himself declared, he was but an operative – albeit a powerful one – in a grand institutional scheme authored by the top brass and commissioned by General Bajwa. Instead of punitive measures against him, the political leadership should call for a truth and reconciliation effort, the forum for which should be the parliament. But that would require a massive political heavy lifting and vigorous narrative-building, for which the current government does not have the intellectual bandwidth and institutional wherewithal. There does not appear to be any organic grassroots effort on the horizon either that would hold the civil and military elite’s feet to the fire. Sections of the intelligentsia have made the clarion call, but absent a political response to it, prospects of bringing Pakistan back from the brink are dim.

Mohammad Taqi

The writer is a Pakistani-American columnist and commentator. He tweets @mazdaki.

The post To Bring Pakistan Back From The Brink, Military Must Put Its Money Where Its Mouth Is appeared first on Dissent Today.

Mr Khan believes that the Pakistani constitution does not apply to him, that the Pakistan law doesn’t apply to him – FM @BBhuttoZardari in an interview with @kalpenn, @TheDailyShow
1/4 pic.twitter.com/ExsIwAqn8m

— PPP (@MediaCellPPP) March 15, 2023

Officials from law enforcement agencies have been trying to enter the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s chairman’s Zaman Park residence in Lahore since yesterday to arrest him in connection with the Toshkhana case. However, after the PTI chief asked his supporters to “come out on roads”, protests erupted in various cities of the country with the PTI supporters stopping security personnel from entering Imran Khan’s residence.

During the clash between the PTI supporters and security personnel outside Zaman Park, as many as 54 policemen have been injured so far.

Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari made the statement in an interview with Kal Penn, who also served as the White House staff member in the Barack Obama administration.

Host Kal Penn asked the foreign minister about the unrest in Pakistan over Imran Khan’s arrest and the former premier’s allegations that the coalition government is trying to arrest him so he could be disqualified from the upcoming elections.

To this, Bilawal Bhutto said that Pakistan is currently facing unprecedented political, economic, climate, and security challenges.

“Unfortunately in all this chaos, we have the question of Mr Khan, who believes the Pakistani constitution does not apply to him, Pakistan law does not apply to him,” he added.

The foreign minister said that Imran Khan is facing arrest because of his “ego” as he made a complete “mockery” of Pakistan’s judiciary system by not appearing before the courts. The courts finally ordered his arrest after he failed to show up during court hearings.

“He has violated the court’s orders by refusing to present himself for the hearings,” Bilawal Bhutto said.

Bilawal Bhutto said that PTI chief Imran Khan has called on his workers to confront the police and has created complete chaos in the country.

“Imran Khan is distracting people from the real issues,” the foreign minister said.

News Desk

dissenttoday.net

The post Imran Khan Thinks He Is Above Pakistan’s Law, Says FM Bilawal  appeared first on Dissent Today.