Amidst the strange gloominess of Pakistan’s political environment, in 13 cities of Pakistan there appeared on Monday the green-hued posters/banners urging Chief of Army Staff General Raheel Sharif not to leave (read: resign), and to impose martial law. A little known “Pakistan Party” from Punjab, registered with the Election Commission of Pakistan three years ago, is ostensibly behind the campaign asking General Sharif to “overthrow the democratic setup” and “lead the country.” This party had come to limelight after its “campaign” for extension in the army chief’s service tenure a few months ago. The central chief organiser of the party, Ali Hashmi, has said that the purpose of the campaign was to suggest to the army chief to form a government of technocrats by imposing martial law, and moreover, that General Sharif should supervise it himself. Hashmi and his band of merry men/activists are of the opinion that since all the affairs of the country have been operational without the presence of the prime minister of Pakistan, the present government is a superfluous entity. The people running the country’s affairs can manage them without a political government. Hashmi further added that his political party is also planning to hold rallies in different cities of Pakistan to garner support for a military government. The fact that these banners went up on the main boulevards of 13 cities in the country has raised many eyebrows. And a justified sense of trepidation. The places where these banners were put up also include highly secured cantonment areas. There were concerned voices in the wake of silence from the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), the official mouthpiece of the army, further adding to the rumours of a political turmoil after the Panama Papers controversy and the prime minister’s absence from Pakistan. And despite a categorical repudiation from the ISPR of any connection to the highly objectionable posters, the noise has not subsided yet. Moreover, there has not been any reaction from the government circles or the opposition parties in response to the campaign that has triggered many a political analyst and conspiracy theorist to dissect the not-so-warm civil-military ties. There are always some elements that remain ready to find ways to “endear” themselves to the establishment to make an “unholy” alliance under the guise of noble intentions. Similar instances have been witnessed during previous dictatorial regimes in Pakistan. Although General Sharif clarified his position on the issue in February this year, putting all rumours to rest, these recent campaigns do raise suspicions of a possible backing from some elements in favour of overthrowing the democratic setup. Any call for overthrowing a democratic government falls into the category of sedition. With government currently under pressure in the wake of the Panama leaks, any action against the campaign may just be an exercise in redundancy at the moment, as well as highlighting the apparent lack of trust the public has in the government General Raheel Sharif in his role as the leader of the armed forces has, time and again, manifested the dedication he has towards his job, and the devotion he has towards protecting Pakistan against enemies within and without. It would be an honour for Pakistan to bid adieu to him in full recognition of his military service, and his pragmatism as a military leader in the backdrop of the precarious environment after the Army Public School massacre, and during the on-going Operation Zarb-e-Azb. There is simply no point “pushing” him to don the role of a civilian leader, a position that despite their absolute authority and almost decade-long continuous tenures endowed both of them, General Zia-ul-Haq and General Pervez Musharraf – in the end – with nothing but the harshest criticism and unvarnished anger of the public. Even the end of their tenures had one common sign: of ignominy. In a country like Pakistan that has seen almost 30 years of military rule with almost identically negative results, any demand for a military takeover of a governmental civilian set-up is a blatant mockery of the very sanctity of the system of democracy. And despite the fragility and weaknesses of democracy in a country like Pakistan where much needs to be done to achieve a globally accepted standard of good governance, there is no justification – none whatsoever – to put forth an argument for a military rule. As some wise man mused once upon a time, even the worst form of democracy is better than the best dictatorship.*