LAST Friday’s weekly write-up was about suspects who had been disposed of by their ‘accomplices’ under the watch of the police in Punjab. Fresh evidence has emerged to reconfirm the suspicion that the trend is not confined to a world where our efficient law enforcers are after petty criminals involved in crimes such as robbery and murder. The practice is as rampant in other areas. Take politics where, among others, Imran Khan is under ‘friendly’ fire of the severest kind from a woman party colleague.

At the other end, an effort is on to help Nawaz Sharif find a way back into power with one particularly adamant democracy fan asking for a retrospective-effect annulling of articles in the Constitution that have allowed Mr Sharif’s judicial ouster from power. Whereas this remains somewhat of a difficult target to achieve, a gigantic task has been undertaken by sections that must heap the blame for the unfortunate eventuality on those who advised the disposed prime minister.

This is a familiar formula for rehabilitating a fallen prime minister in Pakistan. It has been successfully used in the past to cleanse stigmatised chief executives of the past. In fact, the only ruler in memory who ever — and always — claimed to be working with his associates towards a common goal happened to be Gen Ziaul Haq. He made a point of always speaking on the authority of his rufqa-i-kaar — his companions or accomplices so to speak. No one believed him. No one tried to get him absolved of the allegations he so easily and genuinely attracted. Not even those who long projected themselves as Zia’s just heirs.

But let’s not take the familiar path of terming Mr Nawaz Sharif’s fall some kind of a nemesis for his old loyalty to Gen Zia. That has now degenerated into a boring an exercise. To be honest, the court ruling which threw him out of power might have created sympathy amongst some of the more rabid and unflinching Sharif detractors. Quite visibly, the wave of support from certain progressive quarters is there, which is an improvement on the reaction to his ouster.

Let’s not take the familiar path of terming Nawaz Sharif’s fall some kind of a nemesis for his old loyalty to Gen Zia.

This is in large part due to Mian Sahib’s conscious effort to draw closer to the circles which act and are referred to loosely as the liberals. They have been coming closer to the changed Mian Sahib, who, his more recent admirers would appear to suggest, has taken an exactly opposite direction to what Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, everyone’s favourite grand leader, had shaped through time. In the case of Mr Nawaz Sharif, it was a journey from right to left but what he couldn’t escape despite his best intentions and modifications in his approach was his vulnerability to fall for cheap and disastrous consul of advisers. And for convenience’s sake the bad advisers.

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was doomed, we are told in utter disregard of his autocratic style, not just because he listened to advice but because of his folly of actually implementing suggestions. Now who could it be who dared to advise ZAB, that too in moments when, it can be presumed, ZAB was a little irritated by the crisis he was faced with?

Ms Benazir Bhutto’s acumen, it would appear, enhanced proportionally to the delinquent ways of those within whispering distance of her. Mr Nawaz Sharif it seemed was more dependent on an aide to push him towards the exit. The accounts about his previous forced departures from the prime minister’s house typically find him being almost coerced by his advisers to surrender. There were no such inside stories this time even though the same gentleman, Chaudhry Nisar, who was in accounts of past, shown as helping Mian Sahib ease out of power, was there, kind of predicting the third ouster a day ahead of the marching orders from the court.

Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan is one of those whose advice — it is being said — the fallen prime minister needed to follow. But it’s an assertion that makes little sense. It may not sound strange in the Pakistani context that Mian Sahib must have spent extended periods of his time as the prime minister figuring out who would best suit in the event he was, once again, forced to quit midway through his term.

It can be argued that now that he is done with the ritual of governing the country for a few years, the ousted leader is on schedule confronted by a situation which direly threatens his existence as a politician. He could have been feeling worse had he not been careful in choosing his associates for this battle ahead. It can be safely assumed that he okayed the option in opposition to advice given to him by some of his closest original allies.

This could well be presented by the liberal PML-N as proof of just how changed Mian Sahib today is. The close aide from Rawalpindi is today considered to be an adviser made redundant by the PML-N leader’s choice of embracing the pro-democratic, so-called liberal but generally pro-progress forces over and in spite of his alliances with old-fashioned, sincere, moderate, conventional politicians such as Chaudhry Nisar.

One simple assumption would be that these associates of choice were already there waiting for the eventual arrival of Mian Sahib and his cause which they can now jointly champion. There are obviously principles involved, frequently. But as is true for all conflicts and contests, it is the personal strength of a candidate in the arena which defines the quality and zest of those willing to fight for him or her. Nawaz Sharif must be visibly a strong contender given the quality and spread of his support. The least this support demands from him is an assurance to fight till the end.

The writer is Dawn’s resident editor in Lahore.

Published in Dawn, August 4th, 2017