THE Supreme Court has restored the status of PTI as a political party and ordered the ECP to allocate the reserved seats to it as per its share in the assemblies, while overturning the Peshawar High Court endorsement of denial of these seats to the party.

Neutral observers joined the PTI in hailing the majority SC decision as a huge win and the righting of a wrong against it. The PML-N predictably appeared unhappy and started to question elements of the verdict which, it believes, gave PTI relief that the party had not even sought.

The PML-N and other elements of the hybrid regime it fronts would be well advised to accept the verdict, as there is no other option and move on in the hope that it does not create a momentum for an accelerated end to the current government.

What I mean by an accelerated end is that an infuriated judiciary, after several reported instances of intimidation/ attempted intimidation, can now put its foot down on the accelerator in terms of the election tribunals that will hear petitions against the declaration of ‘success’ of the PML-N, MQM, etc, in constituencies where the PTI believes it was robbed of a legitimate win.

The practitioners of realpolitik and the guardians of the Constitution and law have demonstrably and dramatically diverged.

This isn’t to say that for a sizable parliamentary majority of the governing coalition — even if the country’s highest court has struck down what was always seen as a dubious two-third superiority — to dwindle to a minority won’t take time, particularly through a long-drawn out legal process.

But if the conduct of the process indicates that the tribunals, supported by the superior judiciary, are keen to quickly reach decisions on electoral petitions then it could create anxiety and nervousness in the ranks of the hybrid set-up, forcing it to embark on rash measures.

There are several aspects of the decision and how it may play out politically. The first is obviously the question whether, buoyed by the verdict, the PTI has what it takes to rally round its supporters and create mass pressure on the streets to accompany its increased presence and pressure in parliament. Or whether this verdict which vindicates the PTI’s stance will go some way in pacifying it. If it is indeed pacified somewhat, it might play the waiting game to get more and more relief from the courts and possibly the freedom of its leaders before embarking on any agitation or mass movement.

As these lines were being written, the iddat conviction against Imran Khan and his spouse Bushra Bibi has been overturned on appeal as the judge threw out the case of the latter’s former husband Khawar Maneka, on the grounds that he appeared to have had no issues for six years about matters he raised in this case against his ex-wife.

Lawyers will know more but after this conviction was overturned it isn’t clear what other grounds will be there to keep Mr Khan (and possibly his spouse) behind bars. A day before the reserved seats verdict by the SC, an anti-terrorism court in Lahore denied his bail before arrest application in the May 9 case.

The court appeared to endorse the state’s view that the PTI leader was behind the conspiracy which led to the unrest that day, amounting to waging war against the state and its institutions. It isn’t clear whether Mr Khan has been arrested in that case as we speak.

So there is the Constitution and the law. And then there is realpolitik. The two will inevitably come into a more open clash, now that the practitioners of realpolitik and the guardians of the Constitution and law have demonstrably and dramatically diverged.

Against the backdrop of considerable uncertainty about the emerging political scenario the verdict has created, the IMF has announced it has reached a $7bn staff-level agreement with the government of Pakistan which, the monetary institution and the government say, will usher in more economic stability and consolidation.

The agreement is subject to approval by the IMF Board, which is not known to change the terms or disagree with what staff-level accords encapsulate.

That, in turn, means that the burden of more taxes and prohibitive utility bills is likely to increase on sections of society whose resources are already stretched to the limit. Many commentators, including this columnist, have expressed fears of public anger at these hikes spilling out into the open.

One can only hope that despite being crushed by taxes and higher and higher utility bills, the inflows from the IMF, other development financial institutions such as World Bank and Asian Development Bank and bilaterally from the Gulf and even China can create a feel-good factor mitigating public anger.

But any feel-good factor will have limited impact if the average Pakistani continues to hurt where it counts, ie, in the pocket. So far the only positive emerging from a dismal state of affairs is that the provinces have agreed to levy and collect agriculture income tax. Here, too, the question remains whether they have the means and wherewithal to assess and collect such a tax over a relatively short period.

A resurgent and confident PTI, backed by the courts, can make life very difficult for those at the helm. It has already been demonstrated to the latter that brutal force has diminishing utility/ returns because it loses its ability to ensure desired results.

Thus far the ‘iron hand’ has been sheathed in a civilian glove. Is there a risk that rather than being pushed into irrelevance by a thousand cuts, the state decides to fight back, shedding all facades and pretences? For all our sakes and for the sake of our beloved land one hopes not.

The writer is a former editor of Dawn.

abbas.nasir@hotmail.com

Published in Dawn, July 14th, 2024