Islamabad, Pakistan: The founder of PTI Imran Khan and his party need a constitution that can only fulfill their objectives, they also need an army chief who can pave the way for their party, they also need a Chief Justice who can give decisions in favor and they need the entire system to be such that it can only strengthen their party, which is why this party tries to fool the public by spreading negative propaganda against the state, state institutions and important state figures on social media every day.
A series of baseless allegations against the state and state institutions based on the constitution are continuing through PTI’s social media accounts.
PTI should be asked whether there is no democratic system in the country at this time? Are the National Assembly and Senate not working? Is the legislative process not going on in both houses? Are the provincial governments, including Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, not working?
The Pakistan Army has repeatedly stated in unambiguous terms that the Pakistan Army is a national army that has no political agenda. The army is neither against nor in favor of any political party, the army has a professional and official relationship with the government.
There is no doubt that the Pakistan Army has always cooperated with elected governments to promote national stability and democracy, and its sole aim has been national stability. The constitutional role of the army is very important for the security and democracy of the country, and it always works in cooperation with elected governments and within the framework of the constitution.
PTI needs to understand that the powers of the Parliament and the Prime Minister are enshrined in the Constitution. If the Parliament, the Prime Minister and the military leadership are taking the country towards betterment by maintaining national stability, balance between institutions and staying within the ambit of the Constitution, then where does it prove that the military leadership is interfering in anyone’s powers?
The problem is not the “interference” of the army but “non-interference” of the army
Until recently (when PTI was in the ruling federal government), the Army Chief was a “patriot” and PTI did not object to his appointment. When the founder PTI was in power, he used to say all the time that “the army and we are on the same page”, and his government relied completely on the army, but as soon as the army decided to remain neutral from politics, the PTI started criticizing it and calling it an enemy of democracy.
After the 2018 elections and coming to power, as long as the interests of the founder PTI were being served, he was being praised,
even some PTI leaders were comparing the Army Chief to a father-like relationship – but as soon as the institution decided to remain neutral according to the constitution and law, the PTI declared it an “undeclared martial law”. This contradiction clarifies the double-dealing attitude of the PTI, whose aim is not to defend democracy but to achieve its political interests.
The problem is not the “interference” of the army but “non-interference” of the army. When the army was working in the interest of the PTI government, it was being declared the biggest democratic force, but as soon as it decided to remain neutral according to the constitution, PTI remembered democracy.
The fact is that PTI has no interest in democracy, but only wants to use institutions for its politics. When the no-confidence motion was brought against the Imran Khan, he sought help from the army, but when the army refused to intervene, he declared it his enemy. The legal action being taken against the founder of PTI is not the result of any political revenge but the result of his illegal actions. He was involved in the Toshakhana case and corruption worth 190 million pounds, ran the party through illegal funding, and was involved in inciting his party workers to attack state institutions during the May 9 incidents.
The courts gave verdicts against him after transparent investigations, but instead of accepting these verdicts, he is presenting himself as a political prisoner. When he was in power, the courts were fine, but when the verdicts came against him, the same courts became “weak” and “biased”?
After the 26th Constitutional Amendment, the judiciary has gained more powers, which has also increased its prestige. All the verdicts are given by the respected judges of the Supreme Court, High Court, and Sessions Courts, and there is no hint of military leadership anywhere.
