The Islamabad High Court allowing the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) to pitch its protest camp at the Parade Ground has prompted the Punjab and ICT administration to impose Section 144. What followed was expected. Police came into action to disperse gatherings, and arrested political workers. Curtailing political parties’ right to protest, while the leadership of the PTI has been left scot free, does not merely represent the dilemma of a society that is wondering whether or not the rule of law has been compromised for the sake of democracy. The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), which had once campaigned for independence of judiciary, has flouted the directives of the Islamabad High Court. The Punjab government also has to justify police crackdown against PTI political workers in Rawalpindi. Political parties have a responsibility to assume the safe path in their bid to capture power. Quality of leadership reflects in not throwing the low cadres before state’s brute force. There should immediately be a change in the colonial-era 1868 Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), which Capital and Punjab administration are invoking to unleash brute force against protesting political workers. The PPC does not guarantee human dignity if a citizen gets caught into it, for it is a colonial-era law, and takes ill intentions against government as the biggest crime. That the law is soft on certain segments of society is why a rally at the Abpara went undisturbed despite Section 144 being in place. Whether Pakistan is a monarchy or a democracy, the law of criminal procedures stands testimony to it, not the tall claims of the ‘big’ political parties. By invoking a particular clause of the PPC concerning public order, government goes after intention of individuals, not their actual doings. Maybe the ICT administration read a great deal into the statements of the PTI leadership concerning Islamabad lockdown, but the same was done despite the clear directives of the Islamabad High Court to restrain PTI’s protest to the Parade Ground, and remove containers from roads. The mainstream political parties, which undertook parawise revision of the 1973 Constitution, have not bothered to reform the PPC despite the fact that the same law has victimised them in the past. The PPC remains a lethal weapon to silence the dissenting voices. What is happening now is understandable. The panicked PML-N has merely assumed the designated path and, quite unwisely, rendered the Court irrelevant. What the contest between the PML-N and the PTI will leave behind all depends on whether the two parties stick to legality or rhetoric. It is civility that matters. The world is watching us. We, after all, are not living in colonial times. The country is not under martial law either. While the PTI should not seek advantage in chaos, and use its political workers as sacrificial animals, human dignity must be taken into consideration while ensuring peace. Political workers should not be deprived of their right to protest for the sake of democracy. The PML-N has lost a golden chance of installing elected local governments as per the spirit of 140-A despite conclusion of electoral process a year before. It has stepped too much into the shoes of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) but, unfortunately, has been left alone to face the consequences. Had the leadership of the ruling party had any brains it would have made haste in taking benefits of democracy to the grassroots level before its commitment in this regard was questioned by its daring opponents. The PPP that has championed the rights of small provinces, and has been duly rewarded through its control over the Senate, has seen the PML-N government in the Centre as a shield against incursions on the 18th constitutional amendment. When the PPP extends its unconditional support for an elected government, it duly means preserving provincial autonomy sans any commitment to pass the benefits of devolution on to the grassroots level. The Muttahida Qaumi Movement, finally in peril, provides a chance for PPP to look beyond Sindh again at a time its chairman appears eager to regain the glories of the past. So far, the PPP has shown reservations over maltreatment of political workers, and has promised to protest if the PML-N fails to assume constitutional path that it has suggested vis-à-vis the Panama leaks. The leadership, from Bilawal Bhutto Zardari to Qamar Zaman Kaira, has made felt its indignation over curtailment of civilian liberties, but it is still concerned about threat to democracy by the ‘third party’. One may not expect the PPP to repeat the history of 2014 and openly stand by the PML-N leadership this time, but it may risk its integrity if it looks inactive in such turbulent times. How much the PML-N should bank on its contention that the PTI movement is directed at sabotaging the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor? Had it built defences against fiscal deficit, high inflation and burden of taxes on middle and lower income groups, it would not have had to set its back against Section 144. Why is it so oblivious to the need of autonomous as well as resourceful elected local governments for the sake of democracy as well as good governance? Why does the focus of development remains on constructing roads but neglecting basic necessities of life? What should the government expect other than protests by centralising of power in ‘autonomous’ provinces and low spending on education, health, sanitation and drinking water? The case is not different in Sindh where the PPP has been left stigmatised and baffled over unusual deaths of children in Thar. The fact of the matter is that ‘democracy for the few’ has left the weak and fragile part of the population paralysed. They are too weak to walk on the path of protest. While commoners have few job opportunities and experience severe cuts in their purchasing power, they have less to spend on raising and educating their children; 45 percent of children under five years of age are physically or mentally stunted. The rising rate of crimes and the rising scale of social alienation signify the reality that income gap has not only increased but wealth has also been concentrated into a few hands. Finances matter much whether it is about dislodging civilian governments or fuelling anarchy in states. However, the road to peace does not entirely pass through coercive organs but meaningful reforms ensuring devolution and accountability. The worst one can fear now is chaos and the preventive measures that constitute invoking certain provisions of the PPC. If the PML-N has done it, it just speaks a lot about the nature of democracy that we happen to have right now. Going by the core interests the PML-N is watching, it appears that the ruling party will go its entire length to stay the ground. It has drawn lines, and seems to be on a non-reversal course. The judiciary can take stock of the situation, which, of course, involves violation of fundamental rights, but who will implement its decisions? Have the powers that be decided to make Pakistan pass through the situation Bangladesh has passed through for its complete transformation into a democracy? Perhaps the PPP is right in its apprehensions about the third party, the idea that many people seemed to think is not bad. The writer is Director at the Center for Policy and Media Studies