Opposition vs opposition

ISLAMABAD: Opposition in any democracy is government in making, both in normal discourse or even in case of any mid-term or early polls. Therefore, one expect from a good opposition to be well prepared to replace the ruling party, with a team of competent leaders and professionals. It always keeps the government on its toes, but at times accepts its defeat and learns from its own mistakes. In this context, where does opposition stand today? Does Imran have the capacity to lead the opposition and that too from the front?
Imran Khan, the main opposition leader today, who had kept the government on its “toes” for almost two years, brought the government at ease, thanks to his political immaturity, naive strategy and team of poor advisers. Even, after the final report of Judicial Commission, he has consulted some of those “legal minds,” who never took Imran seriously and have remained his political opponents. It is interesting that he started post report consultation after giving his initial reaction of “accepting the report.” Will there be any “U-turn”?
Now, after putting Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on strong footings, Imran and PTI will be facing opposition within opposition in next week parliamentary session. It would now be “Opposition VS Opposition.” What else any government needs if opposition stands divided.
Opposition in matured democracies not only gave alternative programmes, reforms but also keeps difference within opposition at the minimum level. In Imran’s case, it is quite opposite as he confronts the opposition in the same manner in which he hits the government. He not only has the “ability” to fight with all the opposition parties but also keeps his own alleys at distance.
Thus, Imran and PTI will be facing stiff challenge from the opposition during next week’s National Assembly and Senate sessions as there are more resolutions of opposition coming up against the opposition, rather against the government. MQM, JUI-F and ANP have geared up to take “head on” PTI, while PPP makes a balance, though PPP leader Ch Aitzaz Ahsan is expected to make a critical speech against the JC report.
The dilemma of PPP would be about the direction they have to take in the light of JC report. On one hand, it has to accept the report but on the other, they may blame PTI for making PML-N stronger by closing the chapter of “organised rigging.”
Pakistan still has fragile democracy, which has slowly started taking roots, though it is still a long way to go, but the firm believe and resolve of all the major political parties in the Parliament that the change of government would only be acceptable in the constitutional framework and there would be an end to political uncertainty.
Since 1970, only one government has completed its five-year tenure in 2008, while the first elected government of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto held early elections after four years. At least five governments were dismissed within three years of their tenures from 1985 to 2008.
Imran Khan’s historic movement and longest ever “dharna” by any opposition in our political history should be analysed in this context. Similarly, the role of the other opposition in blocking any undemocratic move was also unprecedented in Pakistan’s 67 years.
Historically, opposition took advantages from any move to upset the government. But, during 126-days of “dharna,” the other opposition parties stood behind the “Parliament.” Imran’s biggest setback came when even army chief, General Raheel Sharif, advised him to take political discourse and avoid making unconstitutional demands.
The final report of the Judicial Commission can be criticised or one can raise many objections but Tehreek-e-Insaf does not have a moral authority to reject the report. There is a clear “way forward” in this JC document, not only in the form of shortcomings of the Election Commission, but also on the grounds on which the three major allegations of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf were rejected.
It clearly showed that had PTI’s allegations been covered with evidence, the outcome of the final report would have been at least mixed and would not have been rejected all three points mentioned in Terms of Reference (ToR) agreed upon by government and PTI.
After reading the report carefully, it appeared that PTI’s arguments mainly revolved around the first point of the ToR that elections were not free and fair whereas throughout his campaign, Imran stressed that there was a conspiracy to steal the people’s mandate.
Imran had showed complete confidence on the JC particularly on the Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Nasrul Mulk. So, it was very difficult for him even to say, “I was disappointed.”What we need to understand is the fact that the danger of military takeover has minimised to a larger extent, removal of elected government through unconstitutional means now appears very remote possibility after abolishing constitutional clauses like Article 58-2(B). Thus, the “job” of some conspirators becomes harder and more difficult. There is no more political wing of the ISI, whose role in the past had been very controversial.
During Pervez Musharraf’s period, attempts were made to reintroduce the old political culture when PPP and PML-N were divided.Therefore, the option before Imran is to exploit the mistake of the government, which are many, try to minimise differences within opposition, reorganise his party, keep retired “fouji” at distance and make a new political beginning.
Time and again I have said Imran has future in Pakistan, thanks to poor governance of the PPP and PML-N, but he can not become prime minister by default. He must keep government on its toes, but first try to have its foot on ground before he takes people to the streets again and that too on “solo flight.”
Opposition in any democracy has nothing to lose even it gets a few setbacks. PTI or PPP or for that matter other opposition parties can learn a lot from the final report of the JC, but they can take on PML-N by rejecting the report.
For the government it has now got time and space to work for people’s welfare to counter the opposition’s next move. The PML-N target can be local bodies elections but it must adopt and implement major electoral reforms before the next general elections, which is now set for 2018, unless it commits any major blunder.
But, if the government has evidence of the involvement of two former ISI chiefs in backing, promoting or planning the PTI dharna or creating such a situation, it must be probed and people should be taken to task, as per law. However, the evidence should not be like the one presented by PTI in JC. If they committed the same mistake, the outcome would not be different.
The writer is the senior columnist and analyst of GEO, The News and Jang.