Known for his impulsive nature, once again, Imran Khan, Chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), made headlines with a statement that in indicative of a lack of restraint. Khan stated while talking to the media that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif would be responsible if a “third-force” stepped in as a result of his party’s lockdown of Islamabad on November 2. In other words, the PTI chief is trying to use every possible means to scare the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) government. Due to his not-so-ambiguous statement, a question is being raised on the trust that Khan seems to repose in the sanctity of democracy. Under no circumstances, a call for a military intervention is justified, and the leaders of all political parties that swear allegiance to supremacy of democracy are aware of that. Notwithstanding the flaws of governance in Pakistan, in the backdrop of almost three decades of military rule that did not have any positive effect on the long-term stability of Pakistan, Khan’s usage of the bogeyman of a military intervention is regrettable. The best way to stand proud as a party in opposition is through the credibility of your work. And that is also the best way to win the confidence of the people to secure their vote in the next elections. Constant threats/warnings of street agitation — albeit the cause is noble — are counterproductive in the long run, as people wish to see their elected leaders work in parliament and their constituencies, and not lead dharnas (protests) and jalsas (rallies) as a tool to presssurise the government to listen to its demands. To some extent, the PML-N is also responsible for the present deadlock as the party leadership has so far not presented a clear explanation regarding the Panama scam allegations against the members of the Sharif family. Since all leaders are elected by the people in a democratic set-up to run their country, people have a right to ask the elected leaders to clear their names if an allegation is levied against them. Leaders in return owe explanations to the public for any questions. Why did Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif not categorically clarify his position regarding the ownership of offshore assets by his children? Sharif is the incumbent prime minister of the country, and is answerable to the nation for his own and his family members’ acts. The Panama inquiry is a big one and it cannot be sidelined for the fear of ‘inconveniencing’ Nawaz Sharif. In this situation the role of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) is also confusing. Reportedly, the PPP is busy in its own efforts to extract benefits and strike some form of bargain with the government. Despite its vehement criticism of the government, the top leadership of the PPP is not in favour of politics of agitation. In keeping with the traditions of a thriving democracy, it would be advisable for the PTI chief to focus on winning at the ballot box and not ask for the intervention of the army. Martial law has no place in today’s society. The PTI chief should repose confidence in parliament, which is the right platform for the resolution of all issues democratically, instead of looking for help from some other institution. The threat of the “third force” should not be used as a fear factor or for even opening a discourse on the possibility of such an option. Pakistan is a democracy, and despite its shaky foundations, Pakistan will have nothing but democracy, today and tomorrow. *