Daily Times

Now when the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) march has dispersed, and things should have turned to normalcy, the federal government has started contemplating imposing governor’s rule in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP). The proposal is fraught with long-term risks that can harm the already fragile political environment in the country. While law and order concerns are valid, resorting to the extreme measure of imposition of governor rule would undermine democratic norms. This will disenfranchise an entire province and fuel further political polarisation.

Governor’s rule must be taken as a draconian tool, an ugly leftover of the colonial era. From time to time, the rule has been used in Pakistan’s history, and every time it left behind a legacy of distrust and weakened democratic institutions. From Balochistan in the 1970s to Sindh in the 1990s, these measures disrupted political processes and created vacuums of governance. Most recently, in 2009, the governor’s rule in Punjab did not bring about what it was supposed to. It only deepened divisions, undermined provincial autonomy and escalated political conflict. Such actions erode public trust in democracy and foster narratives of victimisation, as witnessed repeatedly in Pakistan’s chequered political history.

The proposed imposition in KP, based on allegations of provincial resources being used to fuel protests, lacks the nuance required for a sustainable resolution. Political grievances cannot be addressed through executive fiat alone. The ruling coalition should prioritise meaningful dialogue with all political stakeholders, including the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), to chart a peaceful way forward. Isolating or silencing an opposition party, no matter how contentious, is counterproductive to the national interest.

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s recent comments against the politics of agitation call for a need for calm. Yet, his government must heed its advice and avoid decisions that could be perceived as vindictive. TV channels air inflammatory statements from ministers, mostly about threats of the governor’s rule in KP. They must understand that the move risks alienating the people of KP, who already feel neglected in federal decision-making.

Instead of punitive measures, the government should focus on reconciliation. It must address the genuine concerns of all political players and create platforms for dialogue to de-escalate tensions. Previous governor’s rules have demonstrated that such interventions provide no lasting solutions; they merely suppress dissent temporarily, often with explosive long-term consequences. *