TTAP sit-in

Political deadlocks have become almost routine in Pakistan. Sit-ins and blockades are part of the democratic landscape. But there comes a point when politics must yield to principle. When the health of a former prime minister — and arguably the country's most polarising political figure — is said to be at serious risk, the matter ceases to be a partisan contest and becomes a question of state responsibility.

The reported deterioration of Imran Khan's eyesight, now said to be reduced to 15% in his right eye, has triggered a sit-in outside Parliament. TTAP has vowed to continue its protest outside Parliament House until Khan is shifted for treatment, specifically to Shifa International Hospital, arguing that the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences does not have the requisite retinal specialists. The government, however, views the optics differently. While insisting that there has been no negligence and assuring that Khan will be taken wherever he prefers, it has rejected claims of deliberate obstruction. Yet reports of blocked roads and sealed parliamentary lodges ahead of the protest have only deepen perceptions of confrontation rather than calm.

The sit-in, therefore, is not merely about one individual's health. It is a barometer of the country's broader political climate. For the opposition, sustained pressure on the streets reinforces its narrative of victimhood and state high-handedness. For the government, conceding under protest risks appearing weak.

Whatever the political rhetoric may be, the health of such a prominent political figure cannot be compromised at any cost. A former prime minister — and any jailed inmate for that matter — remains entitled to the full protection of the law, including timely and appropriate medical care. The surest way to neutralise political temperature is transparency through an independent specialist evaluation. In matters of health, particularly where irreversible harm is apprehended, there is no room for ambiguity and no justification for delay.