The news is stark and it is unsettling, no matter how expected it may have been: Dr Yasmin Rashid and Mian Mehmood-ur-Rasheed, both prominent figures in the PTI, have each been handed down 10-year prison sentences by an anti-terrorism court. The convictions, handed down in relation to the May 9, 2023 protests – raise serious concerns not only about due process but also about the politicised application of justice. There is no doubt that what happened on May 9 was unprecedented. The attacks on military installations, symbols of the state and public property were shocking and deeply condemnable. Any political movement, regardless of its grievances, must operate within the bounds of the law and engage in peaceful protest. But it is equally important to ensure that the process of accountability is not reduced to a pre-scripted purge of political opponents.
Legal experts have pointed out glaring irregularities in the trials: speedy proceedings, lack of transparency and questions about whether all legal requirements were fulfilled before sentencing. When justice appears to act in haste, especially seemingly under the weight of political pressure, its credibility suffers. The PTI’s claims that the judiciary has ‘collapsed’ may be exaggerated, but the perception of selective justice is not unfounded. Already, political observers had been warning for months that convictions of key PTI leaders, particularly from Punjab, were imminent. The widespread belief that these sentences are being used to disqualify PTI lawmakers and engineer favourable by-elections is difficult to dismiss in a country with a long history of such political manipulation. Former foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi’s acquittal in the same case has not helped, in fact adding to the dissonance. Why was the evidence deemed sufficient to jail some but not others? Are different standards being applied depending on political expediency or internal negotiations? These are legitimate questions and they will remain unanswered.
Meanwhile, the PTI continues to make the same mistake it has repeated throughout the past year – mistaking street power for political strategy. Its announcement that Imran Khan will lead another round of protests ‘from jail’ makes it rather painfully obvious that the party has failed to read the moment. There is diminishing public appetite for political theatre and confrontation. The space for the PTI is shrinking, and unless it engages in political dialogue, even perhaps under the framework of some form of a reconciliation commission, it risks complete political isolation. The idea floated by Raza Rabbani for a second Charter of Democracy must be taken seriously. His call for a National Institutional Dialogue encompassing critical issues such as rule of law, supremacy of parliament, judicial independence and civil-military relations should be heeded. Pakistan just cannot afford more cycles of political victimisation. If democracy is to survive and mature, it must be rooted in consensus. There is no doubt that punishment of the guilty is necessary. But punishment needs process and proportion. Pakistan has seen too many political parties punished for falling out of favour. This pattern must stop. The only way forward is an inclusive, negotiated political settlement. Some sense and semblance of proportionality would go a long way in assuring everyone that the state is not vindictive.
