The protest orchestrated by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) on November 26 stands as a glaring example of political irresponsibility and contempt for the rule of law. In a city already under the strain of economic difficulties, the protestors demonstrated a shocking disregard for peace and the troubles they would impose upon millions of citizens before they decided to march on Islamabad. No propaganda on social media can deny that when the Islamabad High Court explicitly instructed that PTI apply for permission to protest and suggested an alternate venue, it was not merely a guideline; it was a legal mandate. Yet, in a defiant act that can only be described as an affront to democracy, PTI chose to ignore this ruling. The court’s request was not just an administrative formality; it was a necessary measure to protect the rights of all citizens, including traders whose livelihoods hang in the balance. The traders in Islamabad, facing exorbitant rental costs amidst an already challenging economic climate, had every right to oppose a protest that threatened to disrupt their operations. The administration’s imposition of Section 144 was not capricious but a responsible decision aimed at safeguarding public interests. While political parties are entitled to protest, they must do so within the confines of the law. PTI’s leadership opted, nevertheless, to march down the same path that led to chaos, ignoring the potential repercussions of their actions. The decision to proceed to D-Chowk, defying the High Court’s instruction, showcases a blatant disregard for legal parameters. Let us not mince words: this is contempt of court and could not be tolerated. The implication of political activities is not just about the right to protest; it is a fundamental test of respect for democratic institutions and legal frameworks. By choosing to act outside those confines, PTI eroded the very democratic values it professes to uphold. Moreover, the decision to flout Section 144, a provision designed to prevent disorder, raises alarming questions about the party’s commitment to public safety and governance. Politics is not an anarchic free-for-all; it’s about exercising rights responsibly. The PTI’s actions did not just endanger public order but also spotlighted its failure to engage maturely in the political process. While answering a question posed by a journalist, Islamabad DC explicitly mentioned how he had not received any request to plan a change in venue from the protestors. As citizens, we must urge political parties to demonstrate a greater degree of maturity and responsibility. The right to protest is not absolute, and it must not come at the expense of public order and the rights of others. The chaos that unfolded during the November protest stands as a stark reminder of the need for accountability in political actions. The political landscape should reflect a commitment to democratic principles – not a descent into chaos. We invite all stakeholders to reflect on their responsibilities in the pursuit of political goals. The line between right and wrong must be drawn, and it is the duty of political parties to ensure they do not cross it. Only then can we build a society that respects the law, order, and the rights of all its citizens. Although a wrong precedent has been set under which political players prioritise their own whims over the security and the livelihoods of those they are supposedly fighting the crusade for, it can only be hoped (nay, prayed) that tomorrow might be a little better. No propaganda on social media can deny that when the Islamabad High Court explicitly instructed that PTI apply for permission to protest and suggested an alternate venue, it was not merely a guideline; it was a legal mandate. The writer is a freelance columnist.