Ban hammer

Published October 8, 2024

THE decision to ban the PTM under the Anti-Terrorism Act is yet another ill-advised move by the state. Although the government has said the movement poses a threat to national security, many see the decision as an attempt to suppress dissent. History has shown that such heavy-handed moves fail to achieve their desired goals. Rather than quelling unrest, they often exacerbate tensions, pushing marginalised groups further away from the state. If the government has concrete allegations against the PTM or any individuals associated with it, there should be transparent legal proceedings against the suspected lawbreakers. Proscribing the group will only alienate the community that supports it. The fact that two PTM-associated members were elected to parliament without the PTM label is a telling example of how the movement cannot be diminished through repressive actions. It is not the PTM name that resonates with the people, but the issues the movement has highlighted. Targeting it in such a manner will only exacerbate the anger and sense of marginalisation felt by its supporters. In fact, this move could push more people into the arms of radical elements who thrive on state-induced resentment.

Moreover, conflating a rights-based movement with violent terrorist groups is counterproductive. The state must realise that these actions, far from restoring order, will only result in more tension. Over the years, the Pakhtun population has voiced concerns about neglect and discrimination, alleged state violence and enforced disappearances. The PTM served as one avenue through which these grievances were being articulated. By banning it, the government is silencing voices that operated within the constitutional framework. This is not only unjust, it is short-sighted. Instead of bans and violent crackdowns — as was witnessed recently with the dismantling of a protest camp in Khyber — the government should be focusing on addressing the root causes of discontent. The issues of missing persons, alleged state violence, and the lack of political representation need to be resolved through dialogue and reforms. In the same vein, the PTM must hear out state institutions’ objections about the way it conducts its politics. Delegitimising a group through bans has never been a solution, and it never will be. If the state genuinely seeks peace and stability, it must listen to the concerns of the people, rather than stifle their voices.

Published in Dawn, October 8th, 2024

Opinion

Editorial

United stance
Updated 13 Nov, 2024

United stance

It would've been better if the OIC-Arab League summit had announced practical measures to punish Israel.
Unscheduled visit
13 Nov, 2024

Unscheduled visit

Unusual IMF visit shows the lender will closely watch implementation of programme goals to prevent it from derailing.
Bara’s businesswomen
13 Nov, 2024

Bara’s businesswomen

Bara’s brave women have proven that with the right support, societal barriers can be overcome.
System failure
Updated 12 Nov, 2024

System failure

Relevant institutions often treat right to internet connectivity with the same disdain as they do civil and political rights.
Narrowing the gap
12 Nov, 2024

Narrowing the gap

PERHAPS a pat on the back is in order for the ECP. Together with Nadra, it has made visible efforts to reduce...
Back on their feet
12 Nov, 2024

Back on their feet

A STIRRING comeback in the series has ended Pakistan’s 22-year wait for victory against world champions Australia....