In a sensational news conference, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi once again dabbled in the saga of the self-proclaimed Indian sleuth Kulbhushan Jadhav. Five years after his anti-Pakistan activities were astoundedly disclosed by the big boys, his case status continues to go deep down under. For we are waging a crucial battle on two fronts. Determined to always throw a spanner in our works, India has never been an ideal neighbour. Living in a dreamland, the next-door hawks are still having a field day with their so-called victory at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). But quashing their saffron-washed claims might have been easier if Islamabad were not fighting an opposition determined to take a stand no matter what the repercussions may be. As if there was still room for damage after PML-N leader Ayaz Sadiq made Pakistan’s defence policy a laughing stock last year, the Lions were back with Modi’s “yaar” and Pakistan’s “ghaddar.” Case in point: the passage of a bill to provide a right of review to the said spy in the light of ICJ’s verdict. The dismal reality remains that any and all legislation in Pakistan is torpedoed by traitor-branding campaigns without paying any heed to national security. Shouldn’t our political elite be informed enough to know what transpired at The Hague? That India was barely on its toes, ready to drag us back to the court on even a scant shadow of non-compliance is an open secret. Only last month, Islamabad High Court had made note of Indian baseless objections to a trial on Pakistani soil as an attempt to “engineer default”. While New Delhi is actively revving up a juggernaut against what it deems an “illusion of a remedy”, the opposition parties’ behaviour are tantamount to the act of a foolish friend at best. However, if the ruling PTI decides to take a page out of the roaring PML-N’s playbook, it would soon hand them certificates of working with the Indian lobby. Sadly, this is Pakistan in a nutshell. Here in 2021. MNA Ahsan Iqbal was quick to lambast the bill as a deliberate attempt to provide relief to Jadhav. A probable point, but why did his party first make a humungous blunder by denying Jadhav consular access promptly after his arrest? Isn’t the Indian case fundamentally built upon this violation of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention? The ICJ never entertained India’s long list of disparaging remedies. We were only obligated to provide effective review since “the choice of means (was) left to Pakistan.” Don’t these circumstances reduce the opposition’s boycott of the House to a senseless conundrum? This is exactly what FM Qureshi is trying to make legal experts in both leading parties realise. Law Minister Farogh Naseem carries the same sanity banner. He tried to explain how not passing the bill would have led to contempt proceedings against Pakistan in the UN Security Council. Yet, Raja Riaz’s frenzied response, “Do you want to give a message to India that half of the country’s population is with India since we had secured votes of half of Pakistanis?” is a clear sign that the vicious political scoring is far from done. There is no denying the legitimate concerns about the non-consultive nature of this ordinance. And the august house remains the best venue to straighten out the details as well as build mechanisms for future legislations. The spy affair should not be allowed to repeat itself. But then again, how can an assembly be taken into confidence when its member casually talks about its foreign minister’s shaking legs in fear of an Indian attack. In the meantime, the “ghaddar” debate is the order of the day. *