Khan factor vs ‘change’

The tension between the PTI-led protesters and the PML-N led government over the liking issue of the Panama Leaks demonstrates a missing link in political statesmanship on both sides.

Pressing the elected government to resign, allegations, agitations and the Thursday’s crackdown by the government remind of a scene of Pakistan exited in 1990s that has undergone fantastic changes now. Instead of trusting the judiciary, which has proven history of disqualifying two prime ministers in the near past, PTI chief Imran Khan preferred non-traditional means to create pressure against Premier Nawaz Sharif over corruption allegations regarding the Panama Leaks.

Imran Khan is consistently focusing on extra-constitutional methods while expressing his lack of confidence over institutions in Pakistan. In 2014 Imran Khan held a four-month long sit-in against Nawaz Sharif demanding his resignation over elections rigging. This time the Panama Leaks issue instigated the same demand and PTI and its supporters repeatedly threatened to lockdown Islamabad on November 2. Imran Khan, however, was more flexible this time having two optional demands ‘resign or impartially investigate the Panama Leaks case’.

The bigger question is as to why Imran Khan is continuously targeting the factors contributed to changes in the last decade or so. Imran Khan targeted the judiciary, the media, and democratic institutions several times and attempted to divide consensus on smooth continuation of democratic system. One of the most prominent changes that could be clearly observed in the last two elections was consensus among political players on continuation of the democratic system. This change can be witnessed by surveying mainstream political parties like Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), Awami National Party (ANP), Jamiat Ulma-e-Islam (JUI), Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) and others as well as also at the masses level.

In 2014 almost all mainstream parties including PTI’s provincial ally JI opposed ousting the government through extra-constitutional means. Even in the ongoing crises, the opposition parties other than the PTI are not supporting ousting Nawaz Sharif through agitations despite their concerns over the government’s delay on probe into the Panama Leaks.

The consensus was reflected even in the PPP-PML-N agreement called Charter of Democracy that helped in ending of agitation politics in Pakistan that was continuing since 1970s. In 1990s the PPP’s slain Chairperson Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif-led PML-N four times caused toppling of each other’s government.
The independent judiciary is another change on which majority of Pakistani agreed. This second change was also targeted by Imran Khan in his addresses. Occasionally, he went to the extent to degrade the judiciary’s respect in public mind. Even in his press conference on October 27, he criticised Islamabad High Court for taking notice of his controversial claims to lockdown Islamabad. The independent (or powerful) judiciary was achieved after massive movements against removal of the then Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry in 2007. After the restoration of the judiciary with support of people, who supported Lawyers’ movement, the Pakistani apex court became powerful and even disqualified two prime ministers, one of them on corruption charges, in the PPP era after 2008.

Similarly, the Pakistani society appreciated development of independent media during the Musharraf era. The role of the media was appreciated in ousting a dictator, restoration of judiciary, safeguarding democracy in the last couple of years. Due to its public image, media enjoyed respect in public’s mind. The independent judiciary, media, the consensus on democracy and continuation of systems are the changes that discourage any adventurism. It has made toppling of an elected government difficult. No doubt, the changes so far took place in Pakistan are not perfect but at least provide ground for further institutional development like enhanced power of the parliament and responsible role of democratic institutions. The smooth development could minimise corruption and introduce accountability in its real essence if allowed to flourish.
The negative attitude or deriding the institutions could only delay further positive changes in the country. Is Imran Khan, who entered into politics of the country with popular slogan for change, really supporting the shift in Pakistan or going to undo it?

Nevertheless, in the current scenario of political tension, putting the whole responsibility on shoulders of the PTI is not justice. The ruling PML-N is as responsible for the mess too. The situation, emerged after the Panama Leaks scandal and allegedly the involvement of Sharif family in financial corruption, could have been dealt in a better way to avoid the political fiasco gripping the country now. If the allegations against the Sharif family are wrong then why did the Nawaz-led government avoid the implementation of the opposition demands and suggestions? Nawaz Sharif still has opportunity to come up with a solution to clear his reputation in public eyes. Otherwise, the PML-N would have to pay price besides negative impact on political culture of the country.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 29^th, 2016.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.