Since time immemorial there has been a continuing struggle between classes ruling the states—with vested interests to reinforce and protect their incumbency—and those vying to change the system they thought was serving the interests of only the ruling classes rather than the masses and therefore needed to be changed. Not surprisingly, there was no dearth of arguments on both sides to justify and authenticate their stances. Constitutions of most nations do recognise the sovereign and democratic right of the masses to elect governments of their choice. The party which wins the franchise of the majority of the masses forms the government while the others sit in the opposition. Periodic elections as prescribed in the constitution are supposed to ensure a peaceful transfer of power. But it is a regrettable reality of our political history that all the elections that were held in the intervening periods between dictatorial regimes have invariably led to political instability and upheavals. The political parties losing the elections have never accepted the results and their priority has been to destabilise the incumbent government. The unscrupulous politicians who ruled the country during intervening periods between military governments never made a serious and honest effort to reform the exploitative system of governance having inbuilt avenues of corruption which helped them to inflate their fortunes as well as of those who supported them in the game of power politics. Constitution, the law, and morality have been the major casualty. Consequently, the masses have suffered enormously due to their shenanigans. These demagogues have been exploiting the masses in the name of Islam and propagating false narratives to win their franchise.
Imran Khan has surpassed all of them in the game of power politics. Since 2013 he has been relying on false narratives to dupe the people and foment political crisis in the country. Who in the country is not aware of his mantra of 35 punctures in the general elections 2018 based on which he created political turmoil in the country? When the judicial commission in its findings nullified the claims of rigging, in an interview with a private channel he confessed that 35 punctures were only political talk and somebody had told him about it. It was indeed a strong rebuke to his false narrative. Any dignified individual would have changed his ways after that. But like an obstinate child, Imran Khan persisted with his brand of politics. When the conglomeration of the opposition parties known as PDM resorted to a constitutional move to remove him from power, he adopted an unconstitutional way to thwart it without success as the SC taking suo moto notice declared the action of rejection of the no-confidence motion by the deputy speaker, the advice by Imran Khan as Prime Minister for the dissolution of the assemblies endorsed and approved by the President calling for new elections, as unconstitutional. After his exit from power through constitutional means, he devised a narrative of a conspiracy hatched by the USA in connivance with PDM and supported by the establishment and kept rubbing in this notion in almost 70 public rallies that he held around the country, even though our intelligence agencies had rejected his contention of conspiracy. He was particularly harsh on the establishment and castigated its leadership for orchestrating his removal from power, rejecting the claims of the latter that it had decided to remain neutral.
How can a leader like Imran Khan be trusted? Nevertheless, riding on the wave of regained popularity he has been demanding immediate elections claiming that it was the only way to winch the country out of political stability and the unprecedented economic crisis. And to put pressure on the government he has lately announced the dissolution of the provincial assemblies of Punjab and KPK in a few days after consultation with the party leaders and both chief ministers. History is witness to the fact that the popularity of a leader is not the touchstone for claiming the righteousness of the cause or philosophy that he is trying to preach and sell. It is replete with instances when whims and fancies of certain individuals assumed the shape of ‘larger national interest’ and mass hysteria was at times marketed as ‘national pride and honour’ which plunged the nations head-on into catastrophes. The lessons drawn from our history require politicians to change their ways, reform the system of governance and elections through their collective efforts and wisdom and ensure strict adherence to the constitution, law, and internationally recognised norms of democratic behaviour. Holding an election under the existing system which promotes power politics is not the solution to lift the country from the quagmire that it is stuck into.