This text is a transcribed conversation, possibly a podcast or radio interview, between two individuals. One speaker expresses strong opinions about Pakistani politics and the judiciary, alleging judicial misconduct and political bias. The conversation touches upon various topics, including recent political events, the performance of the PTI government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and the implications of the PICA Act on media. The speaker also discusses the treatment of political prisoners and the potential for further political upheaval. Finally, the conversation concludes with personal reflections and hopes for Pakistan’s future.

Study Guide: Analysis of “Pasted Text”

Quiz

Instructions: Answer the following questions in 2-3 sentences each, based on the provided text.

1. What is the speaker’s initial emotional state after the “second letter,” and what does he predict?
2. According to the speaker, how has the parliament of Pakistan impacted the judiciary?
3. What does the speaker mean by “judicial politics,” and what specific action of the judiciary does he criticize?
4. What is the speaker’s opinion about judges having the right to vote, and why does he hold this opinion?
5. What specific event at a PTI minister’s house is mentioned and why does the speaker think it is problematic?
6. What criticism does the speaker level at Justice Asha, and what does he imply about the motives behind her appointment to the Supreme Court?
7. How does the speaker describe the government’s one-year performance, and what was the “celebration” that occurred alongside it?
8. What contrast does the speaker draw between past PTI protests and the recent gatherings he observed?
9. According to the speaker, what shortcomings exist with the PTI’s governance in KP regarding healthcare and education?
10. What does the speaker say regarding the lack of support for those jailed in connection to the May 9th events, and how does he feel about this?

Answer Key

1. The speaker is not feeling good and believes that the “downfall” of three or four judges has begun. He also says that he feels like some judges will soon be eating plain roti, like he is, which suggests a future of hardship.
2. The speaker feels that the parliament, with its law-making power, has taught the “political judiciary” a lesson and defeated judicial activism, asserting that it has gained the upper hand.
3. “Judicial politics” is when the judiciary tries to influence or write the political script of Pakistan. The speaker criticizes a section of the judiciary that attempted to politically manipulate the system and then tried to start their political careers after being defeated.
4. The speaker does not believe judges should have the right to vote because they should not have any political opinions that could affect their decisions; their role should be politically neutral.
5. The speaker mentions an incident where all the judges and the registrar were gathered at a PTI minister’s house. He considers this problematic because it suggests that the judiciary was in the “pocket” of PTI and was celebrating the win with them.
6. The speaker claims Justice Asha was brought to the Supreme Court out of turn because she was a supporter of PTI, meaning her appointment was based on political alignment, not merit, and to “pack the courts.”
7. The speaker mentions that the government presented a positive view of its one-year performance, highlighting economic improvements. On the other hand, a political group celebrated and did not have any public protests, suggesting the government was in control.
8. The speaker notes that past PTI protests were marked by containers and roadblocks. However, the recent gatherings saw no such obstacles, suggesting the recent events were “their own fight.”
9. The speaker says that PTI has not built any hospitals or universities in KP where people from Punjab or Sindh want to seek treatment or education, despite being in power for 13 years, questioning their accomplishments.
10. The speaker feels it’s sad that the party of those jailed for the May 9th events aren’t fighting their case, nor taking their names, and that people are not even aware who is inside or has been released. He describes those jailed as anonymous soldiers.

Essay Questions

Instructions: Develop a well-structured essay for each of the following questions using the provided source material.

1. Analyze the speaker’s critique of the judiciary. What specific instances does he cite to support his argument that judicial activism and “political judiciary” are detrimental to Pakistan?
2. Explore the speaker’s perspective on the PTI’s governance in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP). How does he use the lack of quality healthcare and education to undermine the party’s achievements?
3. Discuss the role of media and public perception as portrayed by the speaker. How does the speaker describe the relationship between politicians, media outlets, and the public in Pakistan?
4. The speaker presents multiple examples of individuals (judges, politicians, journalists) who are either praised or criticized. What criteria does he seem to be using for his judgments, and what does this reveal about his values and perspectives?
5. Evaluate the speaker’s views on the relationship between political power, the judiciary, and public opinion. How does he position the role of each within the context of Pakistani politics?

Glossary of Key Terms

• Judicial Activism: A judicial philosophy that goes beyond interpreting the law and tends to use the power of the judiciary to effect policy change or correct societal wrongs.
• Political Judiciary: A term used by the speaker to describe a judiciary that he sees as being influenced by or acting on political considerations rather than upholding the law impartially.
• PTI (Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf): A major political party in Pakistan, formerly led by Imran Khan, that has been in power at various times, and is subject to criticism and commentary in the provided text.
• PICA Act (Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act): A controversial law in Pakistan designed to regulate online content, but is also viewed as a means of government control over free speech and journalism.
• Yamasaya: Likely refers to a celebratory event, which the speaker contrasts with the government’s one-year performance presentation.
• Chief Justice: The head of a country’s judicial system; in this context, the speaker discusses the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of the Islamabad High Court.
• Patwari: A term used in South Asia for a land record officer, and here likely refers to people in public service, sometimes with negative connotations.
• Vakalatnama: A legal document authorizing a lawyer to represent a client in court.
• Kotak Kel: This term is used in the context of preventing containers from being placed on the roads.
• Baniyas: An ethnic group associated with business; in this text, it implies that this group is interested in making money more than public service.

Pakistani Politics, Judiciary, and Media: A Critical Analysis

Okay, here’s a detailed briefing document based on the provided text, covering the main themes, important ideas, and including relevant quotes:

Briefing Document: Analysis of “Pasted Text”

Date: October 26, 2023 Subject: Analysis of a Spoken Commentary on Pakistani Politics, Judiciary, and Media

Overview: This document analyzes a lengthy spoken commentary, likely from a recorded conversation or a broadcast, offering insights into Pakistani politics, the judiciary, media landscape, and social issues. The speaker expresses strong opinions and critiques various actors, including judges, politicians, journalists, and the current government. The tone is conversational, often anecdotal, and sometimes impassioned.

Main Themes:

1. Judicial Activism and Political Interference:

• The speaker is highly critical of what he perceives as “political judiciary” and its attempt to “write the political script of Pakistan.” He believes the judiciary has overstepped its boundaries and is engaging in political activism.
• He specifically points to a group of judges, potentially led by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, who he feels were attempting to become “the real rulers of Pakistan.”
• He claims that this section of the judiciary, after being “defeated” by Parliament, is now trying to start their own political careers.
• Quote: “That section of the judiciary which was trying to write the political script of Pakistan has been defeated and after being defeated, they are trying to start their political career.”
• The speaker argues that judges should not have any political opinions that influence their decisions, and even suggests they should not have the right to vote.
• He cites the example of a Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court whose son-in-law was a minister of PTI, alleging that the judiciary was perceived as being “in the pocket of PTI” due to this connection.
• Quote: “…there has not been such a Chief Justice of Lahore High Court whose son-in-law was a minister of PTI and all the judges were gathered at his house…the judiciary was in the pocket of PTI…”

1. Parliamentary Supremacy & Defeat of Judicial Activism:

• The speaker emphasizes that the “Parliament of Pakistan has had the upper hand” and has “defeated judicial activism” through its “parliamentary power and law-making power”. This signals a shift in the power dynamic between the judiciary and the parliament, a major victory for parliament according to the speaker.
• Quote: “for the first time, the Parliament of Pakistan has had the upper hand, that the Parliament has defeated judicial activism and the Parliament of Pakistan has defeated the political judiciary with its parliamentary power and law-making power.”

1. Criticism of Judges and their Appointments:

• The speaker questions the merit-based appointment of judges, particularly focusing on Justice Asha, whom he claims was brought into the Supreme Court “out of turn” because she was a supporter of Imran Khan.
• He argues that the courts were being “packed” with judges loyal to Imran Khan’s PTI, and that current changes are a reversal of this process.
• Quote: “Justice Asha also came to the Supreme Court as a result of that coat packing in a junior capacity because her thinking was pro-PTI…”
• He strongly suggests some judges are acting out of personal and political agendas rather than based on merit.

1. Critique of PTI Governance in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP):

• The speaker is highly critical of PTI’s performance in KP, where they have been in power for 13 years. He questions their development claims, asking for evidence of a hospital or university that draws patients or students from other provinces like Punjab or Sindh.
• He believes the PTI leadership has acted in a “Baniya” way, primarily focused on personal gain and money.
• Quote: “tell me about a hospital in which people of Punjab or Sindh want to get treatment…there is not even a single hospital in 13 years There is neither a university nor a road, they are Baniyas…”
• He accuses “people like you” of teaching them such corrupt behaviors.
• Analysis of Current Government’s Performance & Celebrations:The speaker discusses the government’s first-year performance, noting its claims of reducing interest rates, inflation, and increasing stock market values.
• He contrasts this with a celebration of the government’s one year of service. He specifically mentions the lack of roadblocks and containers on the streets during the celebrations, contrasting it with the way PTI handled their political gatherings.
• Quote: “Yesterday was a day when on one side a government was telling its one year performance, on the other side a political group…Yesterday in Yamuna, no road was blocked, did you see any container placed in the whole of Pakistan?”
• Media and Freedom of Speech:He raises questions about the impact of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PICA) on freedom of expression and media viability.
• He argues that many news channels are struggling financially, not because of the PICA act alone but due to the unsustainable business model. News channels that do not have entertainment and sport segments are particularly vulnerable.
• Quote: “…the viability of the houses which have news channels alone, which do not have entertainment or sports along with it, will definitely be in question because news alone is not sustainable.”
• He acknowledges the existence of “shameful” journalism on social media, but stresses that lies and deceit should be pointed out.
• He also discusses how the news channels have been sold and the involvement of businesspersons in the industry.

1. Critique of PTI Leaders and 9th May Protests:

• He is critical of PTI leaders, especially those who have been arrested in relation to the May 9th protests, and mentions that these individuals are not being supported by their own party and advocates for lawyers to take up their cases.
• He mentions several individuals by name who are suffering a sense of helplessness.
• Quote: ” I am sad that their party is not fighting their case, there is no mention of them, people don’t even remember the names, who is inside, who has come out…”
• He notes that many people who were vocal before are now anonymous, highlighting the consequences of political opposition.
• He cites the example of Imran Riaz, a PTI supporter who left Pakistan and is now running shows from abroad, leaving the PTI workers in a vulnerable position.

1. Other Issues:

• The speaker touches on issues like the deportation of Pakistanis from America, saying he’s in favour of that action and advocating for the deportation of all Afghans as well.
• He expresses frustration with the Supreme Court denying his legal rights by not responding to his letters.
• The speaker also makes personal references to some individuals, including Mian Shahbaz Sharif, suggesting he wants to meet him for a private discussion.

Key Ideas/Facts:

• There’s a strong perception that the Pakistani judiciary has been overly politicized and has attempted to exert power beyond its constitutional role.
• The Parliament has seemingly gained the upper hand over the judiciary in the current political climate.
• The appointments of some judges, particularly those seen as sympathetic to PTI, are being questioned.
• PTI’s governance in KP is seen as largely unsuccessful, with little to show in terms of public institutions that attract people from other provinces.
• The current government’s claims of economic improvement are presented positively.
• Media channels in Pakistan, specifically those without entertainment and sports wings, face financial hardships.
• PTI leaders are accused of abandoning workers arrested in relation to the May 9th protests and have become anonymous soldiers.
• The speaker’s conversation style is very informal and conversational.

Conclusion:

The provided text offers a critical and often cynical perspective on the current state of Pakistani politics, the judiciary, and the media. The speaker expresses strong views on the political motivations of various actors and highlights a perceived struggle for power between institutions. The commentary also reveals concerns about the future of governance and the impact on freedom of speech and civil liberties. The text reveals that there are deep divisions and distrust in Pakistan’s institutions.

This analysis should be helpful in understanding the nuanced arguments and concerns raised in the source text.

Pakistan’s Political Landscape: A Critical Analysis

FAQ: Key Themes and Ideas

• Q1: What is the main concern expressed about the judiciary in this text?
• A: The primary concern is that a faction within the judiciary is acting politically, attempting to “write the script of Pakistan’s politics” instead of adhering to their judicial role. There is an accusation that judges are making decisions based on their personal political views, not on the law itself. This is described as “judicial politics,” where judges are actively engaging in political maneuvering. The author believes this group of judges has been defeated in their attempt to control the political narrative.
• Q2: How does the text view the relationship between the parliament and the judiciary in Pakistan?
• A: The text argues that the Parliament of Pakistan has, for the first time, asserted its authority over the judiciary. It posits that the Parliament has defeated “judicial activism” and “political judiciary” through its parliamentary and law-making power. The author views this as a positive development, suggesting that the judiciary should not attempt to dictate political outcomes. The parliament is portrayed as having the upper hand.
• Q3: What are the criticisms made about specific judicial appointments?
• A: The text criticizes the appointment of certain judges, particularly Justice Asha, to the Supreme Court. The claim is that she, along with other junior judges, were brought in to pack the court with supporters of a particular political viewpoint (pro-PTI). This is described as “coat packing” and an attempt to fill the court with people who would align with a political agenda, which is now being undone. The text suggests that these appointments were not based on merit but on perceived political alignment.
• Q4: How does the author characterize the performance of the PTI government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP)?
• A: The author is highly critical of the PTI government in KP. They ask rhetorically, if in 13 years, the PTI managed to build a hospital where people from Punjab or Sindh would seek treatment. The same criticism is applied to schools and universities. The author asserts that the KP government did not establish a single good hospital and university where people from other provinces would seek to use their facilities. The text suggests that the government prioritized money-making activities over providing essential services, labeling them as “Baniyas”.
• Q5: What is the author’s opinion on the PTI’s protests and public gatherings?
• A: The author contrasts the PTI’s protests of the past, which they claim involved the use of containers and road blockages, with a recent gathering by a political group. They suggest that this newer gathering, while having internal conflicts, was significantly less disruptive, without containers or a large public presence. This implies a decline in the PTI’s ability to mobilize large-scale protests. There is a suggestion that the recent events are a sign of the PTI losing influence.
• Q6: What is said about the media and the PICA Act in this text?
• A: The author acknowledges that the PICA Act has impacted media, but argues that certain channels that are facing financial difficulties were already struggling before the law came into effect. They contend that the news sector itself is not viable for news channels alone, without sports and entertainment, within the existing advertisement industry. The text also alludes to a time when journalists could make false claims and that a new accountability is in place due to the PICA act.
• Q7: What are the concerns expressed regarding the legal representation of individuals arrested in connection with the 9th May events?
• A: The text expresses sadness and concern that many of those arrested in connection with the events of 9th May are not receiving adequate legal support from their own party. It is stated that many of these individuals are known to the author and that they are good people. It laments that no one seems to care about or remember them, their party and lawyers are not making any effort to secure their legal rights or even meet with them. Prominent lawyers that are usually involved in this are no where to be found.
• Q8: What is the author’s general tone and perspective on current events in Pakistan?
• A: The author conveys a tone of strong opinion and analysis. They seem to view political events with a degree of cynicism and a focus on what they perceive as power plays. The author is critical of the PTI, the judiciary’s political involvement, and what they consider biased appointments, and media bias. They suggest that some politicians have also gotten away with actions that should be called out, and seem to believe that Pakistan is going through a difficult time. Overall, the perspective is one of concern about the direction of the country and its institutions.

Judicial Politics in Pakistan

Judicial politics, as described in the sources, involves the judiciary’s attempts to influence or interfere with the political landscape of Pakistan. The sources suggest that certain judges have overstepped their bounds by engaging in actions that are considered political, rather than focusing on their judicial duties.

Key points about judicial politics from the sources:

• Judicial Activism: The Parliament of Pakistan has reportedly defeated “judicial activism” and the “political judiciary” using its parliamentary and law-making powers. This implies that the judiciary was perceived to be overreaching its authority and involving itself in matters that are more appropriately addressed by the legislative and executive branches of government.
• Writing the Political Script: It is alleged that a section of the judiciary has tried to “write the political script of Pakistan” and has been defeated. This suggests an effort by some judges to shape political outcomes, which is seen as inappropriate for a neutral judiciary. The sources say that some judges were trying to start their political careers after being defeated in this endeavor.
• Political Bias: There are concerns that some judges have political leanings that influence their decisions. It’s noted that while a judge may have personal political opinions, those opinions should not affect their judicial decisions. For example, one judge is described as having pro-PTI leanings which led to their appointment to the Supreme Court out of turn.
• Judges’ Right to Vote: There’s a view that judges should not have the right to vote to avoid any perception of political bias. This is because judges should not have any political opinions or thinking and should not be involved in political activities.
• Judges’ Connections: The sources mentions examples of how judges and their families have close ties to political parties. For instance, a Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court had a son-in-law who was a minister of PTI, and judges gathered at his house. This raises concerns that the judiciary was in the pocket of PTI.
• Court Packing: The sources alleges that junior judges who were supporters of Imran Khan were brought to the Supreme Court to pack the court with PTI supporters.
• Consequences of Politicization: According to the sources, those judges attempting to engage in political activities have been defeated and sidelined. The sources imply that such actions damage the public’s trust in the judiciary.

Overall, the sources paint a picture of a judiciary that has been, in part, actively involved in political matters, raising questions about its impartiality and adherence to its role as a neutral interpreter of the law.

PTI Governance and Judicial Influence

The sources provide some information regarding the PTI (Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf) government, particularly in the context of its performance and its perceived influence on the judiciary. Here’s a breakdown of the key points:

• PTI’s Governance in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP): The sources question the achievements of the PTI government in KP, where it has been in power for 13 years. Specifically, the sources challenge whether PTI has improved healthcare and education in the region, asking if there is a single hospital in KP where people from Punjab or Sindh would seek treatment. Similarly, the sources ask if there is a university where students from other provinces would want to study. The sources suggest that the PTI government in KP has failed to create significant improvements in these sectors. It is alleged that they are “Baniyas,” and people like the speaker have taught them to make money.
• Judicial Appointments and Bias: The sources alleges that during the PTI government, junior judges who were supporters of Imran Khan were brought to the Supreme Court in order to pack the court with their supporters. It’s also mentioned that a judge, Justice Asha, was appointed to the Supreme Court out of turn because she was seen as pro-PTI. The sources suggest this was a deliberate attempt to influence the judiciary with PTI’s political leanings.
• PTI’s Influence on the Judiciary: The sources allege that the judiciary was perceived to be in the pocket of PTI. This perception is based on incidents such as a Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court having a son-in-law who was a minister of PTI, and judges gathering at his house.
• PTI Protests: The sources contrast the PTI’s past protest tactics with recent events, noting that during PTI protests, container camps were installed, but recently there were no such roadblocks. The sources suggest that the recent lack of roadblocks indicates that it was not a PTI-led protest. The sources also mention a fight within PTI in Swabi.
• One Year Performance: The sources contrast the PTI with the current government, which has presented its one-year performance to the public. The current government has said it reduced the interest rate, brought down inflation, increased the stock exchange, and increased reserves.
• PTI Leaders: The sources mention some PTI leaders such as Sheikh Waqas Akram and Salman Akram Raja were in Swabi instead of Lahore. It also mentions that Fawad C Saab was a minister during PTI’s time in power. The sources also mention that many people associated with PTI have been jailed, and the party is not fighting their cases. It is also noted that one of Imran Khan’s supporters, Imran Riaz, went abroad.

Overall, the sources are critical of the PTI government’s performance, particularly in KP, and raise concerns about its influence on the judiciary and the justice system.

Pakistan’s Political Judiciary

The sources discuss a “political judiciary” as a key element of judicial politics, where the judiciary is perceived to be influenced by political considerations rather than strictly adhering to legal principles. Here’s a breakdown of the concept based on the provided sources:

• Definition: A political judiciary refers to a situation where judges’ decisions and actions are driven by political motivations, biases, or affiliations, rather than by an objective interpretation of the law. This is seen as a negative phenomenon, undermining the impartiality and neutrality expected of the judicial system.
• Judicial Activism as Political: The sources suggest that “judicial activism” is a manifestation of the political judiciary, where the judiciary overreaches its authority and becomes involved in matters that are more appropriately addressed by the legislative and executive branches of government. The sources suggest that the Parliament of Pakistan has defeated judicial activism.
• Writing the Political Script: The sources claim that some members of the judiciary have attempted to “write the political script of Pakistan”. This implies that they have tried to shape political outcomes and exert political influence, which is seen as an abuse of their judicial power.
• Political Bias in Decisions: The sources express concern that some judges’ political leanings influence their decisions. It is stated that while a judge may have their own political views, those views should not be reflected in their judicial decisions. One example was that Justice Asha was appointed to the Supreme Court because she was viewed as pro-PTI.
• Judges’ Connections: The sources highlight instances where judges have close ties to political parties, such as the Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court having a son-in-law who was a minister of PTI. These connections raise concerns about the judiciary’s impartiality and whether it is influenced by political affiliations.
• Court Packing: The sources allege that there were attempts to pack the courts with judges who were supporters of Imran Khan. This is seen as an effort to use the judiciary for political gain. The sources say that some junior judges were brought to the Supreme Court out of turn for this reason.
• Consequences: The sources indicate that judges who have engaged in political activities have been defeated and sidelined. The sources also suggest that this kind of behavior damages public trust in the judiciary.
• Judges’ Right to Vote: The sources argue that a person who becomes a judge should not have the right to vote because they should not have any opinion in politics. It is also suggested that judges should not have any political thinking.
• Failure of the Political Judiciary: The sources claim that the political judiciary has failed in its attempts to write the political script of Pakistan. They suggest that the Parliament of Pakistan has had the upper hand and defeated the political judiciary with its parliamentary power.

In summary, the sources describe a “political judiciary” as a judiciary that has been compromised by political influence, bias, and overreach, thereby undermining its credibility and role as a neutral arbiter of justice. The sources express a critical view of this politicization, highlighting its negative consequences for the judicial system and the political landscape of Pakistan.

Pakistan’s News Channels: Finance, PICA, and the Future

The sources discuss the state of news channels in Pakistan, particularly in relation to their financial viability and the impact of regulations like the PICA Act. Here’s a summary of the key points:

• Financial Viability: The sources suggest that the news channel industry in Pakistan is facing financial challenges. It is noted that many channels may not be sustainable on news content alone. This is particularly true for channels that do not have entertainment or sports programming. The rise of cricket as a major draw for viewership has further strained the finances of news-only channels because a large portion of advertising revenue goes to cricket programming.
• Channels for Sale: The sources mention that some news channels in Pakistan were already for sale before the PICA Act was introduced. It is stated that some channels were being sold because of the financial pressures in the industry, and that real estate people were buying channels to help their businesses. However, it is also suggested that the PICA Act may have further destabilized the industry and prompted more channels to become available for purchase. It is noted that a South African party was making offers on some of these channels.
• Impact of PICA Act: The sources suggest that the PICA Act has led to a climate where some channels are being sold. However, it’s also noted that the financial issues existed before the PICA act. The sources suggests that because of the PICA act, one cannot speak against the government. However, the sources also state that one can do as much as they want as long as one does not lie.
• Advertising Industry: The sources also note that the advertising industry in Pakistan cannot support the large number of news channels.
• News vs. Entertainment/Sports: The sources explain that news channels that also have entertainment and sports divisions are more viable because these other divisions help to support the news programming. The sources imply that stand-alone news channels are not sustainable.
• Ownership Motives: The sources mention that some people buy news channels to support their real estate businesses. These owners may have a second-class status, which is improved by owning a news channel.

In summary, the sources paint a picture of a struggling news channel industry in Pakistan, facing financial pressures due to the large number of channels, the dominance of cricket in advertising revenue, and the challenge of remaining viable with only news programming. The PICA Act may have further exacerbated these challenges.

Imran Khan and the PTI: A Critical Assessment

The sources provide several points about Imran Khan and his political party, PTI, touching on his government’s performance, his supporters, and his current standing. Here’s a breakdown:

• PTI’s Governance: The sources are critical of the PTI government’s performance, particularly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP).
• The sources question whether the PTI government in KP improved healthcare and education. Specifically, it asks if there is a single hospital in KP where people from other provinces would want to go for treatment or a university where students from other provinces would want to study.
• It is suggested that the PTI government in KP has failed to create significant improvements in these sectors. The sources also allege that they are “Baniyas,” and people like the speaker have taught them to make money.
• Judicial Influence: The sources allege that during Imran Khan’s government, there were attempts to pack the courts with judges who were PTI supporters. It is said that junior judges were brought to the Supreme Court out of turn because they were seen as pro-PTI. This is presented as a deliberate attempt to influence the judiciary with PTI’s political leanings. The sources also suggest that the judiciary was perceived to be in the pocket of PTI, with examples such as a Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court having a son-in-law who was a minister of PTI, and judges gathering at his house.
• PTI Protests: The sources contrast the PTI’s past protest tactics with recent events. It is noted that during PTI protests, container camps were installed, but recently there were no such roadblocks. This suggests the recent lack of roadblocks indicates that it was not a PTI-led protest. The sources also mention a fight within PTI in Swabi.
• Imran Khan’s Supporters: The sources mention that many people associated with PTI have been jailed, and the party is not fighting their cases. It is noted that many of these people are not being visited, and even lawyers are not willing to take their cases. One of Imran Khan’s supporters, Imran Riaz, went abroad.
• Criticism of PTI Leadership: The sources are critical of the PTI leadership. For example, the sources note that Fawad C Saab was a minister during PTI’s time in power. It also mentions that some PTI leaders were in Swabi instead of Lahore during recent events.
• Imran Khan’s narrative: The sources mention that Imran Riaz used to say that he would never leave Pakistan and that freedom would be taken by force. However, he is now abroad.
• Current Political Standing: The sources mention that some of Imran Khan’s supporters have become “anonymous soldiers”, suggesting a decline in their prominence or influence. The sources also state that Adal Raja, who is associated with Imran Khan, was left alone and became a “complete dog”. The sources also mention that Salman Ahmed Salman has been expelled.
• Imran Khan’s supporters in the Judiciary: The sources note that Justice Asha came to the Supreme Court out of turn because she was a supporter of Imran Khan.

Overall, the sources present a critical view of Imran Khan and his party. They question the performance of his government, particularly in KP, and raise concerns about his influence on the judiciary and the justice system. The sources also highlight a decline in the prominence of some of his supporters and a lack of support for those who have been jailed.

By Amjad Izhar
Contact: amjad.izhar@gmail.com
https://amjadizhar.blog

Affiliate Disclosure: This blog may contain affiliate links, which means I may earn a small commission if you click on the link and make a purchase. This comes at no additional cost to you. I only recommend products or services that I believe will add value to my readers. Your support helps keep this blog running and allows me to continue providing you with quality content. Thank you for your support!