Daily Times

Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif has perhaps tried to move too fast in redefining the parameters of military-civilian engagement, but he has moved too slowly in responding publicly to demands for street agitation from political parties that failed to make a serious dent in last year’s elections. While the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) rallied in the streets of Islamabad ten days ago, demanding electoral reforms and lambasting a certain television news channel, the PM was in Iran, bemused at what he believed were passing tirades by traditional critics. As the fracas between the news channel and the military turned ugly, the government tried to remain aloof. Its unstated position was that the courts, regulatory bodies and the National Assembly exist precisely to air these grievances and seek redress. It stuck to pursuing its economic agenda and tackling the many crises that plague the country. However, the critics have turned out to be more nebulous than simple agitators, and their demands for protest mixed with appeals to religious sentiments and nationalist fervour have taken on a sinister tone. Lately they have called for stopping the wheels of government altogether. On Sunday, Information Minister Pervaiz Rasheed made a belated though correct public statement that the trend of demanding ‘street justice’ must end and that no one should be allowed to play judge and advocate at the same time. He also said that the case against the television channel was now with the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) and must be decided there. The allegation of blasphemy against the channel and the hysteria it has created probably prompted the statement but the minister’s observation was clinical. Mobs tend to bypass legal process and act as judge, jury and executioner if they are whipped up to hysteria. Any rumour, accusation or misgiving can spark a cycle of violence that is impossible to predict once the mob’s adrenaline starts pumping. Accusations of blasphemy that are the result of propaganda and constant manipulation by religious parties that have created a furore against a private media group are in this vein of hysterical popular anger, except they are more dangerous because they involve religious sentiments. Where religion enters the picture, logic, dispassion and rational assessment, the foundations of law, go out the window. Hence ‘street justice’ is not justice at all, but vigilante expressions of anger and violence, manipulated by vested interests that stand to gain from violence.
Political actors in this country should take lessons from recent events in other countries. In Ukraine, a nominally unpopular democratically elected leader was forced out of office by a mob but the junta that took his place lacks legitimacy and as a result the country is fracturing along ethnic and political lines. Part of the country has been annexed by Russia, which arguably has more legitimacy than the central government in separatist areas because it appeals to ethnic sentiments that were ignored by the mob. In Thailand, a democratically elected government was stymied after sustained agitation by defunct political parties unhappy with former Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra. Commentators believe the constitutional crisis in Thailand is heading towards civil war. In Egypt, a tyrant was forced out of office by protest, but attempts by a democratically elected government to attack his support base backfired spectacularly. Ironically, the elected government tried to muscle the establishment using street protests, but the protests lacked an identity and were repugnant to the wider Egyptian community. This led to the quick demise of the elected regime and a return to military rule. These are stark reminders that street agitation is easily manipulated but cannot be controlled. The street cannot be allowed to replace the state and its supporters risk the integrity of the system as a whole, not just democracy. The rule of law must be respected and procedure followed in solving political problems. The PM cannot afford to ignore the situation anymore despite all the other problems that need his attention. He needs to take the lead in healing the military-media spat and in the process shore up his democratic credentials. *