Democratic spaces in Pakistan are shrinking. In his inaugural speech in the National Assembly, Prime Minister Imran Khan promised to promote openness and transparency. But, in place of transparency and openness, we are witnessing increased censorship, selective accountability, and outright suppression to cover an emerging governance deficit in the country. The proposition that nearly all important decisions are being taken not in the prime minister’s office but elsewhere does not appear to be far from reality. Governance in our part of the world is a complex affair. Our democratic leaders have to actively engage, negotiate, and mediate with several power centres. Federal bodies have to engage and negotiate with other federal and provincial bodies within the constitutional framework of separation of powers and federalism. Given our unique political context, the elected leadership has to often negotiate with the bureaucracy and the military, often termed as the Establishment. At the end of the day, elected leaders are directly accountable to the public. They have to bear the brunt of popular anger and dissatisfaction. Un-elected institutions are neither attuned to the needs of the people nor accountable to the electorate. The elected leadership, therefore, has to operate in a complex political matrix to implement its agendas and policies while engaging and negotiating with other entrenched forces and vested interests. PTI government enjoys the benefit of a rather silent media Pakistan has been made into a fertile ground for the present government to implement its plans and policies. Leaders of two main political parties that have dominated the political landscape of Pakistan since the ’90s (with a decade of intervening military rule) are either behind bars or facing corruption cases. Street protests are being met with the police force and arrests. Opposition leaders have made angry calls for protests against the incumbent government. But they are keen to avoid a political deadlock like Imran Khan’s dharnas. They realize that chaos will only benefit un-elected institutions. Even the floor of the National Assembly has not been available to political leaders to air their grievances. The PTI government enjoys the benefit of a rather silent media. The curtailment of government advertising that started during the caretaker regime has been continued. This has plunged the electronic media into financial crises, expense cuts, and layoffs. Noted journalists have been laid off or moved from away from primetime slots to be replaced by more compliant ones. Voices critical of the regime are ridiculed by others and censored by the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority. Distribution of newspapers across various cities and towns has been repeatedly disrupted. Fearing the consequences, newspapers are refusing to publish stories that expose the foreign assets of a government minister or report sensitive issues like the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement. The government has been acting like a mere bystander to the treatment of the PTM and its leaders. The democratic leadership has to realize that the tragic deaths at Khar Qamar, regular harassment of the PTM’s leaders, and a complete media blackout of the PTM can leave permanent scars. The National Assembly speaker has not even issued production orders for Ali Wazir and Mohsin Dawar to attend the NA session. Would this not further strengthen the feeling of alienation amongst PTM supporters? The democratically elected leadership has to open the avenue of dialogue and facilitate reconciliation. They, however, seem to have abdicated their position in an uncritical adherence to the “time is up” mantra. Imran Khan received a major boost from the lawyers’ movement in support of the independence of the judiciary and has, on various occasions, expressed his commitment to the rule of law. When it came to filing the reference against Justice Qazi Faez Isa, however, the prime minister did not consider it necessary to even discuss its contents his cabinet colleagues. News of the filing of the reference was selectively leaked on May 29, reportedly, to the surprise of many members of the cabinet. The cabinet was only informed about the filing of the reference on June 3. The prime minister, in leaving the cabinet out of the picture, acted in complete disregard of the constitutional principles of collective decision-making. Whether the president applied his independent mind to the contents of the reference is not known. Had the prime minister or the president bothered to consult the Federal Board of Revenue chairman, they would have found that a tax-filer is not required to state the independently acquired properties of his or her spouse or children. More questions arise about the filing of the reference because of its timing. The reference was filed after the Faizabad Dharna judgment. The question is: What does the prime minister want? Does he not want the judges of the Supreme Court to exercise their powers without a fear of consequences? If that’s what he wants, is he in a position to take a stand? As Pakistan plunges deep into a crisis of governance, the elected leadership will have to stand and find its own agency. While suppression and selective accountability can silence dissent in the short term, no long term solution will come out of such measures. Imran Khan has to realise that governance cannot be outsourced and that the power of the elected leaders cannot be left with un-elected institutions. At the end of the day, he will have to answer and pay the price. The writer is a lawyer based in Lahore