As Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar defended Pakistan’s civil liberties record at the U.N. Human Rights Council, opposition leaders lamented “suppression” of a planned gathering in Islamabad, underscoring persistent political instability in Pakistan.
Pakistan is no stranger to political suppression. Any political party, once in power, often turns its guns on its rivals, hampering efforts to stage public gatherings. Since the May 9, 2023 riots, however, the space for public dissent has narrowed to a sliver, with the PTI—and any forces allying with it—bearing the brunt of the state’s displeasure.
While the PTI has an open field in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, where it is in government, it has struggled to organize any major rallies in the rest of the country, often facing denial of administrative approval over security concerns. In recent weeks, the party has attempted to mount a joint opposition alliance, hoping a united front will enable it to exert greater pressure on authorities to allow an airing of grievances. The plan has yet to yield results.
According to opposition leaders, their first planned huddle in Islamabad on Feb. 26 struggled to take off after multiple venues refused to host them. The venue eventually secured also sought to distance itself, urging the opposition parties to seek an alternate location for the second and final day of their conference. The message is clear: dissent is unwelcome.
The government cannot continue to claim a commitment to fundamental rights even as it systematically moves to suppress those same rights. Such actions also prove counterproductive, as they inadvertently lend suppressed voices an aura of martyrdom rather than neutralize them. Citizens that might otherwise remain apathetic find themselves seeking out their views, believing suppression only occurs if something significant Ultimately, absence of open dialogue creates a vacuum that is quickly filled with speculation and frustration. Citizens question if the government has any narrative to offer, rubbishing any positive steps as mere distractions.
It is not too late for the incumbent government to course correct. Rather than silencing criticism, authorities should instead engage with their opponents, addressing real issues through a robust counter-narrative. If the prevailing policies persist, the state will no longer be able to claim any moral high ground—and it will have lost the war of narratives without its opponents even getting a chance to speak.