Delaying tactics

Things on the political front don't seem to be heading towards any kind of calm any time soon. While the National Assembly session has finally been summoned by Speaker Asad Qaiser on March 25, the opposition is up in arms over the delay – for which the speaker has used a rare constitutional provision – saying that per the constitution, the session should have been summoned yesterday (March 21) given the no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Imran Khan. Things have reached Article 6 level threats by the opposition against the speaker, if he keeps using what they say are delaying tactics. Unpacking the nuances of the no-confidence back and forth between the government and the opposition is best left to legal minds but on the face of it it seems the government is trying to buy some time in light of the presidential reference about the defection clause, seeking clarity on Article 63(A) from the Supreme Court.

In a Supreme Court hearing yesterday – on a plea by the Supreme Court Bar Association, seeking SC’s intervention in preventing anarchy ahead of the no-confidence vote – the SCBA had argued that the right to vote should not be infringed upon. The next hearing regarding the presidential reference on Article 63(A) is set to take place on March 24, and will hopefully clarify the defection clause question. Most legal experts believe that the defection clause only comes into play once the vote has been cast and that intentions of parliamentarians cannot lead to disqualification. Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandial seemed to echo similar sentiments on Monday, saying that the court would not wish to interfere in the National Assembly's affairs but would want that no one's right to vote be affected.

While the legal matters play out in court, the ruling party has had a diverse set of reactions to the whole no-confidence matter, starting from attacks and threats then moving to cajoling and persuasion and then reverting right back to veiled threats. Keeping with its track record, the PTI has continued blaming the media when it should be focusing on keeping its numbers intact. In his speech on Sunday, PM Khan alleged that media houses have been receiving funds for campaigns against his government. The Media Joint Action Committee has justifiably criticised his statement, saying this amounts to accusing the media of corruption, and asking the PM to refrain from such defamatory allegations for political point-scoring. It is truly unfortunate how this government’s odd obsession with the media and its continued attacks on journalists have continued, further weakening democratic traditions in the country.

After the Sindh House incident, one would think the government would be more restrained in how it refers to dissenting members of its party and those in the opposition. We have already witnessed how allegations can translate into real attacks. It would be more prudent on the government’s part to make sure its allies do not join the opposition. Unfortunately, what is happening instead is a near-obsessive focus on the dissident members – with the PM's remarks on Sunday easily open to both ridicule and alarming interpretation by overzealous party supporters. The prime minister and his party must know that dog-whistle statements that threaten social boycott or talk about dissenting members' children being bullied at school can develop very quickly into chaos they will not be able to control. Perhaps all sides – in particular the government – need to heed the CJ Bandial's advice to 'fight parliament's war in parliament'. A vote of no-confidence, however unsavoury it may seem to the sitting government and the PM, cannot be battled out at D Chowk. Granted our political leaders have had little respect for parliament, but they would do well to remember that it is that space that gives them legitimacy. A little respect for democratic traditions and processes is sorely needed at this point.