By
Qamar Bashir
Former Press Secretary to the President
Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France
Former MD, SRBC
It appears that, apart from the establishment, all other influential factors are turning against the government, which is now in a dire and ensnared position with no apparent way out. In its frustration, the government is making successive errors and issuing threats, claiming that any disruption to its rule would spell disaster for the country’s stability and survival.
This defensive posture started with a hastily organized and poorly executed press conference by the Information Minister, who announced a ban on the PTI party without proper homework, without any consultation or approval from the cabinet or allies.
Yesterday (18 July), the Defense Minister during an interview presented a surprising and puzzling logic. He claimed that the PTI’s criticism of the USA has ironically resulted in the entire US machinery supporting the PTI. If this reasoning holds any truth, the government has a straightforward strategy at its disposal: immediately begin criticizing the USA even more vehemently than PTI did to garner greater US support.
The fiery Chief Minister of Punjab asserted that any person or party attempting to derail the system would be dealt with severely, implying that the government will complete its five-year term regardless of mandate, legality, or constitutionality. She pledged to hold the Supreme Court accountable for restoring PTI as a political party, accused the judges of bias, and called for judicial accountability.
Mr. Sanaullah of PML(N), who prides himself on quelling the PTI’s long march with force and using security forces to silence opposition, pledged to use all available government resources to obliterate the PTI. He termed PTI as “Fitna” (discord) and a threat to the country’s safety, security, and integrity.
The ruling elite’s narrative is straightforward. They assert that the country is at a critical juncture where any political upheaval risks default. The government claims to have achieved significant economic stability, successfully securing a staff-level agreement with the IMF for a $7 billion loan, improving foreign reserves, reducing inflation, and boosting the stock exchange. They argue that these achievements validate their competence to govern, and therefore, all alleged transgressions should be forgiven, if not, the country’s survival will be at stake.
The narrative of PTI is fundamentally opposed to that of the ruling elite. They argue that even if the government were to achieve miraculous economic feats, it lacks legitimacy due to a stolen mandate. Therefore, the opposition is determined to use all available means to dislodge what they consider an illegitimate government, regardless of the cost.
However, interestingly, the indicators the government once touted in its favor are turning against it one by one both internally and externally.
Internally, the judiciary has become completely independent. It first restored PTI as a party and allocated reserve seats to it. It is likely to frustrate the government’s attempt to appoint retired judges or lawyers as presiding officers in the election tribunals, arguing that the amendment in the Election Act made in 2024 will apply to the next elections. This means that tribunals will make their decisions based on Form 45, which could allegedly result in the demise of PML(N), PPP, and MQM in the parliament.
The government has been touting the boom in the Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) as a key indicator of economic revival, but the KSE-100 index lost 501.46 points today (July 19, 2024), closing at 73,252.56 amid political and economic uncertainties.
Externally, the government is under immense pressure. The US Congress passed a resolution deeming the 2024 elections highly rigged and demanded an independent inquiry and the release of the PTI founder. This was echoed by a UN independent group based in Switzerland. Recently, the European Parliament discussed the elections, expressing serious concerns over widespread rigging and human rights violations, emphasizing the need for Pakistan to uphold democratic principles and human rights.
In the economic and financial sector, the recent Fitch report, vehemently rejected by the Planning Minister, has added further pressure on the government. Fitch painted a dismal picture of the country’s economic and financial status and highlighted significant political instability. The report projected that the PML-N-led coalition government would remain in power for the next 18 months, predicted longer jail terms for Imran Khan, and mentioned the possibility of a military-backed technocratic government.
This step will be necessitated, if the election tribunals through their rulings return the stolen mandate to PTI which being unacceptable, the establishment could directly take over the government, dissolving existing political structures and appointing technocrats to key positions. The establishment, in collaboration with compliant political forces, could push for legal changes or emergency measures to justify the appointment of a technocratic government. It may leverage the judicial rulings to disqualify elected officials and pave the way for a technocratic administration.
Unfortunately, all parties are calling the others to back off from their positions in the national interest without yielding any ground themselves. They define national interest through their own lenses, forgetting that upholding the national interest primarily involves following the constitution and establishing the rule of law in the country.
If sanity prevails, the government should allow the Election Commission and judiciary to independently reconfigure the election results based on Form 45 and accept the decision. The establishment should reconsider any unconstitutional roles, and the civilian bureaucracy should act as true public servants to resolve issues faced by the people. The opposition should refrain from taking the law into their own hands and seek justice through constitutional means. Success would depend on all stakeholders simultaneously reverting to their constitutional roles; otherwise, nothing will make sense.
However, given the current backdrop of political maneuvering, judicial interventions, and international scrutiny, expecting all parties to align constitutionally may be overly optimistic. The entrenched interests and historical patterns of behavior suggest that while the path of constitutional adherence is clear, achieving it requires unprecedented cooperation and goodwill from all involved parties. Without this, the cycle of political instability and institutional distrust is likely to continue, making the sensible suggestion appear impractical in a system where entrenched interests often move counterclockwise
Comments are closed.