On June 26, through a press conference, the DG ISPR told the audience that May 9 was an event tantamount to a conspiracy or revolt against the state. He also claimed that his institution had gathered solid evidence to support his assertion.
The DG ISPR had a right to make any declarations, but that does not mean that all listeners could fall in line with his avowals.
On the events of May 9, the country is divided into two halves: one supporting the claim of the DG ISPR that May 9 was a pre-planned conspiracy (or revolt) against the state and the same reason renders the culprits (and the prime instigator) liable to be tried in an Army court. Disagreeing with this claim, the second school of thought asserts that May 9 was a spontaneous reaction to the arrest of the PTI Chairman, and that, on May 9, the demonstration turned violent.
During the press conference, the DG ISPR also delivered a brief speech to make the audience realize and concede the Army’s stance. The expectation was to earn the favour of the audience and through them the approbation of the public at large. The assumption could be that people in general see eye to eye with the assertions of the DG ISPR. An allied assumption might be that, in 2023, the awareness level of people was akin to those of surviving in 1923.
A problem with a developing country like Pakistan is that every institution wants to regulate the country in its own desired way. People are just mislaid in the country. They are supposed to pay taxes to serve the salaried class and they have to keep on praying for better days to come. They have to take refuge in hoping against hope.
The post-May 9 era divides the PTI into two halves. The first group consists of those who publicly renounce their allegiance to the PTI, denounce the party Chairman, and proclaim to step aside. They are called the pavitra (the hallowed) group, which consists of PTI leaders only. They are not the material meant for passing through the ordeal of the Army courts. They are exonerated (or will be exonerated in due course) and permitted to proceed with their lives. In the scientific lexicon, the process is called positive selection.
The second group consists of those who either refuse to be positively selected or who are not given a chance to be positively selected. In this group, there are a few hardline PTI leaders and most PTI workers. They are destined for the rigour of the Army courts. In the scientific lexicon, the process is called negative selection.
In short, without finding multiple approvers to incriminate the PTI Chairman, the exercise of constituting the Army courts to penalize the PTI’s captured politicians and workers is going to be futile. Moreover, without penalizing the PTI Chairman, the rationale for the Army courts falls flat.
The DG ISPR’s press conference also suggested to the Supreme Court (SC) a message that the Army was determined to go ahead with trying the apprehended civilians in the Army courts. Before Eid ul Adha, the SC valued the message and avoided granting a stay against the Army courts. Nevertheless, the main challenge before the Army courts is that the whole exercise of sentencing a few PTI diehard leaders and numerous arrested fervent PTI workers would be futile if the PTI Chairman remains unscathed– out of bounds of the snare.
To evade the noose, the main defence of the PTI Chairman is that he was in the police custody when May 9 took place. This is the reason why there has been launched an earnest search for finding approvers against the PTI Chairman, who must have masterminded May 9 events.
In an effort to find an approver, main reliance is placed on the pavitra group, though the incarcerated PTI workers may offer some ray of hope. The attached challenge is the number of approvers, as one approver may not be enough. To forestall the question on the credibility of any approver, the Army courts would prefer to secure multiple approvers ready to give statements against the PTI Chairman.
If approvers were found from amongst the pavitra group, the cause of penalizing the PTI Chairman would be served. This is a touchy point. In civilian courts, approvers (even en masse) alone are insufficient. There must be plausible solid evidence to corroborate the statement of an approver. In this way, DG ISPR’s claim that the Army has gathered solid evidence may stand relevant to the Army courts but it cannot stand as acceptable in the courts of law in the civilian domain. The proclaimed solid evidence must pass through the test of credibility and permissibility defined in the civilian law of evidence.
Nonetheless, in a civilian court, the major challenge before multiple approvers would be to establish the timeline of instigation by and coordination with the PTI Chairman. It simply means that the approver strategy to penalize the PTI Chairman is bound to fail in civilian courts. Hence the reason for insistence on the Army courts.
Another challenge before an approver would be how to sustain politics afterwards. That is, any member of the pavitra group who is turned approver would be afraid of the reaction of the PTI workers subsequently. The act of approving against the Chairman PTI would ensure the approver’s political reduction to naught.
During the press conference, two blunders of the DG ISPR are going to cost his office a lot. First, he was indifferent to the formation and the swelling of the ranks of the pavitra group. By expressing this, DG ISPR tried to convey the message that the Army was not involved in the PTI’s disintegration. Second, on May 9, the Army made a strategic retreat to expose the true face of the PTI and, by doing so, the Army ingeniously denied the PTI a chance to play the victim card in case the Army retaliated immediately.
In short, without finding multiple approvers to incriminate the PTI Chairman, the exercise of constituting the Army courts to penalize the PTI’s captured politicians and workers is going to be futile. Moreover, without penalizing the PTI Chairman, the rationale for the Army courts falls flat.
