There is no respite or restrain as political tension escalates in the federal capital with the ambiguous and unfathomable charter of demands put forth by the religious group organising the protest. The group seems to have been emboldened by an overcautious government whose reputation is already plagued with the disqualification of a sitting prime minister on charges of hiding facts about his means of earning. With no conspicuous mention specific to corruption charges the ruling to oust the sitting premier was more about not being honest and true to his declaration of facts before the Election Commission. This is not to say that former prime minister Nawaz Sharif could be salvaged if justice was done on the merit of charges of corruption. There could have been a clear ruling on corruption for justice to serve as a politico-legal virtue. If our judicial history is any guide, too often has it not managed to act as a countervailing force to institutional excesses. Our national memory is full of events of judicial adventurism and provisional and arbitrary rulings against civilian rulers. However, ensuring accountability is more a function of the legislative and executive branches of the state with cross-institutional responsibilities. When the government seems helpless or complacent in establishing the writ of the state even in the federal capital, it hints at some deep-rooted cross-institutional crisis. This crisis, if it persists longer, could turn into an irreconcilable inter-institutional conflict. The conflict could also lead to political chaos and the state could fall in the hands of bigots whose moral narrative of purifying the individual and the state seems to influence popular perception. Disillusioned with the mainstream political forces, progressives, seculars, military rules, and the fast declining popularity of new parties like the PTI, there are convincing trends for a sea change in the political arena of Pakistan. There is a staggering public perception of institutional decay and lack of across-the-board accountability. It is time for the establishment, the political leadership and the judiciary to together define a long-term objective of nation-building, and create a workable mechanism for balance of power between the pillars of state. Justice must be seen to be happening, with visible practical steps of punitive action across the board against individuals and institutions involved in corruption. The public perception of selected accountability leads to dwindling trust in the justice system and, consequently, gives an impression of conflict within state institutions. This has triggered some level of public distrust in the institutional sanctity of justice, accountability, governance and inclusive democratic processes in the country. The visible conflict at the highest echelon of power at the cost of public interest brings in proxies to safeguard parochial political and economic gains. Dharna politics is not about advancing democracy – at least in the context of Pakistan. It did not work in the case of Tahirul Qadri and Imran Khan because they could not offer any better democratic alternative beyond a repetitive bashing of one family. While it was important to condemn the Model Town Lahore incident, it was more important to provide a viable political roadmap for a more inclusive and democratic Pakistan. Politically speaking, both dharnas were failures and could not earn a good reputation for their political leaders. Imran Khan had to call off his dharna when it became a routine concert for young people to throng around for reasons other than the ideology – if any – of Imran Khan. Public perception of justice and accountability is very important when it comes to determining the political future of a country. If people start to believe that it is power, opulence and influence that matter then it becomes hard to establish a strong and inclusive polity. The display of power by a few hundred religious protesters in the federal capital these days is an indication of assertion of power. The dharna culture is far from over in this country and will continue to affect our political course of action in the future. The lack of action against the ongoing protesters seems to show a lack of coordination between various institutions. Embroiled in a battle of political survival in the aftermath of the Panama and Dawn leaks, the current government does not want to open a new front by cracking down on religious zealots in the capital. The danger does not lie in the lack of action; it lies more in a growing perception of dharnas being used to further destabilise the government. Whether or not there is truth behind this perception, the state’s public legitimacy will be eroded further. There must be a visible policy direction so that any perception of there being an inter-institutional rift is dispelled. All we lack is a national narrative on significant political, economic and security affairs punctuated by strong regional, ethnocentric and corporate interests of institutional and territorial domination. In the past Pakistan has used religious groups as strategic assets. These strategic assets were also used as bargaining chips for institutional privileges within the country. Things have changed now, though. A few questions come to mind regarding the current dharna in the capital: what is the political stalemate all about? Why is the government reluctant to act against the protesters? How has this cleric managed to challenge the writ of the state so openly? Who is providing support to these protesters? These are legitimate questions, and these are being asked by common citizens of Pakistan. However, no institution of the state has been forthright enough to address these concerns to the satisfaction of the people. This silence is intriguing, and has strengthened the conspiracies that float around freely. Pakistan is moving nowhere with this political impasse, media wrangling and blame-game. This time around, it is not Imran Khan promoting a specific kind of political culture. This time we have Khadim Hussain Rizvi who is leading the dharna. For a clear majority of poor Pakistanis, it becomes easier to relate to this newly emerging popular idiom of politics rather than what we like to call ‘parliamentary language’. Our parliamentary ethics of language seem more like Victorian morality to a church mouse. Let us have a long-term vision of a developed, progressive, equitable and inclusive Pakistan where a common Pakistani can relate himself/herself to parliamentary language. This would entail bidding farewell to the likes of Imran Khan, Khadim Hussain Rizvi and Tahirul Qadri so that we can reach an exalted culture of parliamentary politics. The fact is that, with the current state of political and economic affairs of dejection, deprivation and poverty, we are unfortunately entering into a cul de sac.
The writer is a freelance columnist based in Islamabad. Email: ahnihal@yahoo.com
