Perhaps, the fourth time would be a charm, and perpetually incarcerated lawmaker from South Waziristan Ali Wazir would be out of the murky waters, once and for all. Now that an anti-terrorism court has granted him bail in a case of alleged sedition (fourth for him), the only one teeny, tiny problem remains the procurement of a safety bond. Set at Rs 1.9 million, the money is proving a little too much for the parliamentarian to arrange. Languishing behind bars for nearly two years, Mr Wazir has been making special appearances in the parliament. And those too have been as scarce as hen’s teeth. It was only in June when PPP’s secretary general Farhatullah Babar lambasted on a public platform against his own party leader and speaker of National Assembly, Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, over the said reluctance in issuing his production orders. What has been going on between the judiciary and the law enforcement authorities is another heart-wrenching saga altogether. Many a time, he has been quite hopeful about his ordeal ending soon only to have the branch pulled back at the last minute. Arrested in Peshawar, he was soon moved to Sindh to be tried on the charges of making incendiary remarks against state institutions. In a very interesting twist, the apex court itself drew parallels between the treatment meted out to him and other co-accused. That a sitting MNA was repeatedly denied the chance to fight for his innocence from outside the jail and even forced to ignore his responsibilities towards his candidature spoke volumes about the state’s lack of tolerance when it came to voices of dissidents. More saddening has been the apparent apathy shown by those sitting on the treasury benches today, who have conveniently forgotten the emotional appeals made during their days in the opposition. Has Mr Wazir’s case lost his appeal now that they are in power? Some in our state institutions have repeatedly shown the extent to which they would go to promote their own institutions; oblivious to atrocious displays of a mocked rule of law and ridiculed constitution in the process. Hate speech should not be tolerated at any cost, no matter who stands behind the venom-spewing megaphone. No qualms about that. But why hasn’t Mr Wazir been offered the olive branches, the middle paths, the “negotiations” (in the words of the Supreme Court Bench) available to those who destroy public property, open fire at policemen and threaten to “paralyse” the entire country at one phonecall? Violent extremists aside, why has Mr Wazir not yet qualified for the same solutions deemed appropriate for another co-accused in the same case? Having lost some of his own to the wrath of terrorism only to be tried in the anti-terrorism court, the hapless leader has already paid a very dear price for speaking out his mind. His life better return to normalcy now! Meanwhile, the state would do better than to take a peek within and consider the implications of isolating policies. *