Editorial
On April 15, 2013, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazal (JUI-F) Chief Fazlur Rehman, who has a track record of joining almost all governments in Pakistan since the Afghan Jihad of the 1980s, told the media in Lahore that no government can be formed (in Pakistan) without him. He said it is (was) not necessary that he will make a government, but it cannot be formed without him, and if it is made, then it cannot survive without JUI-F.
He was right because, despite saying that he would not celebrate August 14 as Pakistan’s Independence Day while addressing a gathering outside Parliament House on August 8, he was inducted into the PDM government just three years later. In the same speech, he also strongly criticised the Pakistan Army. If anybody else had made these comments, he or she could have ended up in jail under Article 6 of the Constitution, but Fazlur Rehman is Fazlur Rehman—a pampered politician in Pakistan. Enjoying all the perks and privileges, he is so overconfident that he has continuously criticised the Pakistan Army while enjoying public funds as a cabinet member until the 2024 elections, which ended the era of JUI-F in politics.
Ironically, Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, which opposed the creation of Pakistan, later became associated with a political tradition in which JUI-F was among the parties that spent the longest periods participating in power-sharing arrangements since the 1970s and maintained strong relations with power centres.
On July 15, 2026, he passed derogatory remarks against state institutions once again, and he appears to have escaped scrutiny. In the same speech, Fazlur Rehman once again criticised the Pakistan Army and questioned the sacrifices made by its personnel in the fight against terrorism.
On July 17, 2026, a petition was submitted against Fazlur Rehman’s comments against Pakistan Army and a sessions court judge in Lahore sought a reply from the Director of the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) seeking the registration of a criminal case against Fazlur Rehman over his remarks about the country’s martyrs. Additional Sessions Judge Malik Latif issued a notice to the NCCIA director and adjourned further proceedings until August 17. The petition requested the court to direct the relevant authorities to register an FIR against the JUI-F chief and proceed against him in accordance with the law. However, nothing happened against Fazlur Rehman, once again showing his enormous influence in the political arena.
Pakistan continues to face the threat of terrorism, with members of the armed forces, other security institutions, and civilians continuing to lose their lives in the line of duty. However, Fazlur Rehman described these sacrifices as merely a consequence of employment or salary. His statements drew criticism because they were considered insensitive and derogatory. His supporters describe him as a skilled negotiator who understands the realities of power and survives by making timely political bargains, threatening state institutions, and using the power of thousands of religious schools under his command, where half a million students are ready to take action against anybody. Critics argue that he represents the darker side of power politics, where influence, strategic alliances, and alleged personal benefits blur the line between political relevance and ethical compromise. His political career has been marked by ideological reversals, pragmatic alliances, and recurring allegations regarding land allotments and state patronage.
Facing allegations of corruption, including cases involving agricultural land allotments in Dera Ismail Khan, such as 4,000 kanals in Rakh Zindani, 1,200 kanals in Rakh Captain Karnal Sher Khan, and 600 kanals of forest land under a Model Farms scheme, he has never even appeared at the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) office for investigation. Despite periodic investigations, land cancellations, and NAB inquiries, many questions remain unresolved. The cases involving Fazlur Rehman highlight broader structural challenges within Pakistan’s political system, where transparency is often questioned, accountability is perceived as uneven, and ethical boundaries continue to be debated. While no final judicial determination has conclusively established criminal liability in several of the matters discussed, the controversy continues to shape public perceptions of Pakistan’s political accountability. Public reporting indicates that NAB investigated allegations relating to assets beyond known sources of income, sought explanations regarding his assets, and summoned him and members of his family during 2020 and 2021. However, according to publicly available information, these inquiries did not result in a final court conviction establishing corruption against him.
Although Fazlur Rehman has frequently criticised state institutions, including the Pakistan Army, and his speeches have been described by critics as encouraging public hostility towards the military, he has never been booked or jailed for such remarks. Some political commentators argue that successive governments have been reluctant to confront him because of his ability to mobilise large numbers of supporters, many of whom are associated with religious seminaries, and because several members of the Afghan Taliban leadership reportedly studied in seminaries linked to his political network.
His opponents claim that he is a political juggler and a spellbinder, and he has demonstrated that he is beyond the system and is a personality who remains too far removed from the legal clutches that an ordinary Pakistani faces, even after uttering something against the state that he does not mean.
