Opposition alliance?
The PML-N Central Executive Committee (CEC) met in Lahore on
October 9, 2018 to discuss the arrest of the president of the party and Leader
of the Opposition Shahbaz Sharif. The CEC decided to launch a protest movement
against what it perceives as political victimisation by the PTI government. Notable
about the meeting was the decision of Nawaz Sharif to curtail the period of
mourning for his wife and step in in the absence of Shahbaz. Chairing the CEC
meeting, Nawaz directed the party’s parliamentary group to establish contact
with all opposition parties for launch of a joint struggle. He accused Prime
Minister Imran Khan of being the author of the National Accountability Bureau’s
(NAB’s) step of arresting Shahbaz. The CEC passed several resolutions,
including condemnation of the arrest of its leadership days before the October
14 by-elections, huge increase in gas and electricity tariff that has fuelled
inflation, the threatening tone of the PTI leadership against its political
opponents, and PTI’s intent to review CPEC projects. Federal Information
Minister Fawad Chaudhry hit back with a statement vowing that the
anti-corruption drive would continue no matter how much hue and cry the
opposition raised. This polarisation also found an echo in the barbs exchanged
by the opposition and treasury benches in the Senate before the opposition
staged a walkout against Fawad Chaudhry being allowed to speak before the
opposition members had had their full say regarding Shahbaz Sharif’s arrest and
the alleged political victimisation the opposition was being subjected to.
Unfortunately, in a familiar scenario, the issue of
accountability has once again become a political football between the
government and the opposition. NAB is castigated by the latter as a creation of
the Musharraf regime to pillory politicians opposed to him, a role it was
continuing allegedly at the behest of the PTI government. The government has
been at pains to deny this, claiming NAB is independent and the cases of
accountability against the PML-N leaders predate its induction. However, the
government should reflect on whether its excessive verbosity on this issue is
providing ammunition to the opposition to play the victim card. If, as the
government claims, it has nothing to do with NAB’s drive, its interests may be
better served by talking less and doing more. Accountability has a sorry
history of political partisanship in our country. NAB and its predecessor the
Ehtesab Bureau both stand accused of putting the political opponents of the
regime they served in the dock. In the case of NAB, its investigation and
prosecution record, especially against the Sharifs, leaves a great deal to be
desired. If accountability is carried on across the board and without any hint
of political agendas or partisanship, no one would be able to object. But
unfortunately, since the Panama case, large swathes of public opinion (not just
PML-N supporters) see the ongoing drive against the Sharifs (and to some extent
PPP’s Zardaris), as politically motivated, flawed in execution on the touchstone
of judicial procedures, and intended to clear the field for the PTI by
relegating the opposition to the margins. Whether a non-partisan, credible
accountability process is possible in the charged and polarised atmosphere
dominating politics currently is a not inconsequential question. It is
therefore all the more necessary that NAB demonstrates in practice that it has
no political agenda or motivation. If it cannot overcome its past reputation
and the current charges of political partisanship against it, this will
accelerate the momentum for the still divided opposition to come closer
together and create a major headache through its protests not only for the incumbent
government, but quite possibly for the fragile national economy that can ill
afford any disruptions in economic activity and social unrest.
No comments:
Post a Comment