It is as though the year 2017 has been erased from the collective memory of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government. What makes the amnesia even stranger is the PTI’s support and endorsement of the TLP – both in 2017 and as recently as April this year. In November 2017, Imran Khan had asserted that his party workers wanted to join the Faizabad dharna. Fast forward to April this year – this time as the prime minister – he insisted his Government and TLP had the same objectives and that only their methodologies differed. Perhaps that is why, earlier in February, his government signed an agreement with the TLP. At the very least, the prime minister and his government owe an explanation to the public with respect to the shift in their approach towards the TLP.
The information minister now wants us to believe that TLP is receiving funding from India. When the government signed an agreement with TLP in February this year, why was the former not aware of this ‘foreign funding’? Stranger still, after TLP first appeared on the political scene, instead of monitoring it’s funding the then Director General of the ISPR, Major General Asif Ghafoor, gave media briefings accusing the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) of receiving foreign funding. Let us not forget that all this has taken place in the aftermath of the Faizabad dharna judgment (Suo Moto Case No. 7/2017). All those shots were fired by those who have always been above regulation but as usual, in the wrong direction.
In paragraph 32 of the judgment, the Supreme Court observed: “The Election Commission’s report states that TLP did not provide information about its funding despite repeatedly directing it to do so.” At paragraph 42 of the judgment, it is clearly stated that when the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) was asked by the court whether the TLP leadership paid income tax or had bank accounts, it responded “by stating that it did not have the mandate to gather such information”.
How did Major General Asif Ghafoor then claim to have information on alleged ‘foreign funding’ to PTM? The answer to this question is pertinent because there must be accountability for how State resources are being used, particularly where their use is arbitrary and motivated by mala fide.
Perhaps members of the current government ought to have enforced the judgment, instead of targeting and persecuting the judge who authored the same. Even after the clear directions in the judgment, the elephant in the room was left untouched and instead all energies of the government and those ‘on the same page’ focused on teaching Justice Isa a lesson for daring to question those who have never been held accountable. Let us not forget that the judgment had observed how the then-government had invoked Article 245 of the Constitution, seeking the assistance of the armed forces, after a hundred and seventy three law enforcement personnel suffered serious injuries in clashes with TLP protesters.
During proceedings, Brigadier Falak Naz was asked about the law that governs the mandate of the ISI, to which he responded that the ISI is governed by the ‘laws of the country’ but failed to mention any specific law. When the two-member bench asked the Attorney General to provide assistance regarding the law governing ISI and its mandate, the Attorney General “tendered a document (in a sealed envelope) which spelled out ISI’s mandate, but requested that the mandate of ISI should not be disclosed”.
Paragraph 42 of the judgment further noted that the Attorney General “did not give any reason for such secrecy except that this was also the practice in other countries but did not cite the example of a single one”. When the Supreme Court examined the precedent world over, it found that the United Kingdom, US, New Zealand, Australia, Canada and Norway have legislation governing their intelligence agencies and clearly delineating their mandates. Instead of clarifying the need to regulate the ISI, the prime minister chose to play the notification game with the chief of army staff.
The highest judicial forum in the country had concluded that “the perception that ISI may be involved in or interferes with matters with which an intelligence agency should not be concerned with, including politics… was not put to rest”.
Paragraph 45 of the judgment reasoned that after the judgment in the Air Marshal Asghar Khan case, “the involvement of the members of the Armed Forces in politics, media and other “unlawful activities” should have stopped”. The Court held: “Instead when TLP’s dharna participants received cash handouts from men in uniform the perception of their involvement gained traction”. What accountability has there been till date for any of this? If TLP are being funded by India, surely all those involved in facilitating TLP, including the Prime Minister and the security officials, must answer for their actions.
The damage done by the TLP dharna was summarised in paragraph 24 of the Faizabad dharna judgment: “They provoked religious sentiment, stoked the flames of hatred, abused, resorted to violence and destroyed property worth 163, 952, 000 rupees. Nearly all economic activity in the country was brought to a virtual standstill by TLP. Pakistan’s Gross Domestic Product for the year 2017 was 32,406,956,000,000 rupees, therefore, each day’s shutdown is calculated to be 88,786,180,821 rupees.” Despite this damning indictment of the TLP by the Supreme Court, the government and the establishment continued to nurture those they are calling ‘militants’ today.
The gap in the narrative will be the government’s own undoing. Without holding itself accountable, any action by the government against the TLP will inevitably be disproportionate and counterproductive. If a bloodbath ensues, more martyrs will be created, who will then further fuel the flames of hatred leading to increasing polarisation.
If the minister for interior remains adamant on contradicting the minister for information and distancing himself from what he sees as the prime minister’s ‘decision’ to deal with TLP, the government will not be able to recover from the self-inflicted political damage. As is, owing to the government’s actions, there is confusion among the general population regarding what exactly the coming days hold.
While one minister claims the writ of the state cannot be challenged, another believes members of TLP are his ‘brothers’. If the government is itself so confused, it is no wonder the TLP feels so emboldened facing a team that keeps knocking over its own players.
The circus cannot continue and difficult decisions must be made. The Faizabad dharna judgment had given important directions, be it with respect to all political parties having to account for their source of funds, or with respect to all intelligence agencies remaining within their respective mandates.
If the government is sincere in cleaning up the mess it gladly participated in creating when it suited its political objectives, it must now start from implementation of the Faizabad dharna judgment in letter and spirit. Had that been on the government’s agenda when it took power, perhaps we would not be standing here today.
The information minister now wants us to believe that TLP is receiving funding from India. When the government signed an agreement with TLP in February this year, why was the former not aware of this ‘foreign funding’? Stranger still, after TLP first appeared on the political scene, instead of monitoring it’s funding the then Director General of the ISPR, Major General Asif Ghafoor, gave media briefings accusing the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) of receiving foreign funding. Let us not forget that all this has taken place in the aftermath of the Faizabad dharna judgment (Suo Moto Case No. 7/2017). All those shots were fired by those who have always been above regulation but as usual, in the wrong direction.
In paragraph 32 of the judgment, the Supreme Court observed: “The Election Commission’s report states that TLP did not provide information about its funding despite repeatedly directing it to do so.” At paragraph 42 of the judgment, it is clearly stated that when the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) was asked by the court whether the TLP leadership paid income tax or had bank accounts, it responded “by stating that it did not have the mandate to gather such information”.
How did Major General Asif Ghafoor then claim to have information on alleged ‘foreign funding’ to PTM? The answer to this question is pertinent because there must be accountability for how State resources are being used, particularly where their use is arbitrary and motivated by mala fide.
Perhaps members of the current government ought to have enforced the judgment, instead of targeting and persecuting the judge who authored the same. Even after the clear directions in the judgment, the elephant in the room was left untouched and instead all energies of the government and those ‘on the same page’ focused on teaching Justice Isa a lesson for daring to question those who have never been held accountable. Let us not forget that the judgment had observed how the then-government had invoked Article 245 of the Constitution, seeking the assistance of the armed forces, after a hundred and seventy three law enforcement personnel suffered serious injuries in clashes with TLP protesters.
How did Major General Asif Ghafoor then claim to have information on alleged ‘foreign funding’ to PTM? The answer to this question is pertinent because there must be accountability for how State resources are being used, particularly where their use is arbitrary and motivated by mala fide.
During proceedings, Brigadier Falak Naz was asked about the law that governs the mandate of the ISI, to which he responded that the ISI is governed by the ‘laws of the country’ but failed to mention any specific law. When the two-member bench asked the Attorney General to provide assistance regarding the law governing ISI and its mandate, the Attorney General “tendered a document (in a sealed envelope) which spelled out ISI’s mandate, but requested that the mandate of ISI should not be disclosed”.
Paragraph 42 of the judgment further noted that the Attorney General “did not give any reason for such secrecy except that this was also the practice in other countries but did not cite the example of a single one”. When the Supreme Court examined the precedent world over, it found that the United Kingdom, US, New Zealand, Australia, Canada and Norway have legislation governing their intelligence agencies and clearly delineating their mandates. Instead of clarifying the need to regulate the ISI, the prime minister chose to play the notification game with the chief of army staff.
The highest judicial forum in the country had concluded that “the perception that ISI may be involved in or interferes with matters with which an intelligence agency should not be concerned with, including politics… was not put to rest”.
Paragraph 45 of the judgment reasoned that after the judgment in the Air Marshal Asghar Khan case, “the involvement of the members of the Armed Forces in politics, media and other “unlawful activities” should have stopped”. The Court held: “Instead when TLP’s dharna participants received cash handouts from men in uniform the perception of their involvement gained traction”. What accountability has there been till date for any of this? If TLP are being funded by India, surely all those involved in facilitating TLP, including the Prime Minister and the security officials, must answer for their actions.
The damage done by the TLP dharna was summarised in paragraph 24 of the Faizabad dharna judgment: “They provoked religious sentiment, stoked the flames of hatred, abused, resorted to violence and destroyed property worth 163, 952, 000 rupees. Nearly all economic activity in the country was brought to a virtual standstill by TLP. Pakistan’s Gross Domestic Product for the year 2017 was 32,406,956,000,000 rupees, therefore, each day’s shutdown is calculated to be 88,786,180,821 rupees.” Despite this damning indictment of the TLP by the Supreme Court, the government and the establishment continued to nurture those they are calling ‘militants’ today.
The gap in the narrative will be the government’s own undoing. Without holding itself accountable, any action by the government against the TLP will inevitably be disproportionate and counterproductive. If a bloodbath ensues, more martyrs will be created, who will then further fuel the flames of hatred leading to increasing polarisation.
If the minister for interior remains adamant on contradicting the minister for information and distancing himself from what he sees as the prime minister’s ‘decision’ to deal with TLP, the government will not be able to recover from the self-inflicted political damage. As is, owing to the government’s actions, there is confusion among the general population regarding what exactly the coming days hold.
While one minister claims the writ of the state cannot be challenged, another believes members of TLP are his ‘brothers’. If the government is itself so confused, it is no wonder the TLP feels so emboldened facing a team that keeps knocking over its own players.
The gap in the narrative will be the government’s own undoing. Without holding itself accountable, any action by the government against the TLP will inevitably be disproportionate and counterproductive. If a bloodbath ensues, more martyrs will be created, who will then further fuel the flames of hatred leading to increasing polarisation.
The circus cannot continue and difficult decisions must be made. The Faizabad dharna judgment had given important directions, be it with respect to all political parties having to account for their source of funds, or with respect to all intelligence agencies remaining within their respective mandates.
If the government is sincere in cleaning up the mess it gladly participated in creating when it suited its political objectives, it must now start from implementation of the Faizabad dharna judgment in letter and spirit. Had that been on the government’s agenda when it took power, perhaps we would not be standing here today.