Tehreek-i-Labaik Ya Rasool Allah (TLYR) chief Khadim Hussain Rizvi on Tuesday revealed that it was the army which ensured the government met the protesters' terms.

"We told them [the government] that we cannot talk to you," Rizvi told Samaa TV on Tuesday. "Then the army came in the middle and our companions met with army and ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence] bigwigs, generals etc."

"They told us they will get all of our demands accepted," Rizvi said in a startling revelation that shed light on why the government seemed to have capitulated so completely to the protesters.

Rizvi said that his team never met the interior minister — whose signatures were present on the agreement — and it "must have been" the army leadership which got Iqbal to sign the document.

Meanwhile, Interior Minister Ahsan Iqbal on Tuesday said that the agreement that ended the Faizabad sit-in had not been desirable, but the government had been left with little choice in the matter.

"Document of finishing dharna was not desirable but there was little choice because if [the] situation had persisted [for] another 24 hrs there would be riots," Iqbal said in a tweet on Tuesday.

After the weeks-long protest, which virtually paralysed the capital and led to several people losing their lives, the government had finally bent its knee to the protesters on Monday after Zahid Hamid resigned from his post as federal law minister.

The minister's resignation came in the aftermath of Saturday’s bot­ched operation against protesters at Faizabad and 'successful negotiations' with leaders of the demonstration late Sunday night, official sources and state broadcaster PTV said.

Six people were killed while hundreds were injured during the operation. The terms of the agreement included blanket immunity for all those arrested during the crackdown on the agitating protesters.

The agreement between the government and the protesters to end the sit-in has subsequently faced much criticism.

Most prominently, Islamabad High Court judge Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui had on Monday lashed out at the government as well as the army for mediating the agreement.

"The army chief, instead of following the orders of the chief executive, became a mediator," Justice Siddiqui had pointed out as he sharply reprimanded the armed forces for straying out of their constitutional role.

"Who is the army to adopt a mediator's role?" inquired the judge. "Where does the law assign this role to a major general?"

Opinion

Editorial

Banning PTI
Updated 16 Jul, 2024

Banning PTI

It appears that the government and its backers within the establishment have still not realised that they are in uncharted territory.
Nato at 75
16 Jul, 2024

Nato at 75

EMERGING from the ashes of World War II, and locked in confrontation with the Soviet-led Communist bloc for over ...
Non-stop massacres
16 Jul, 2024

Non-stop massacres

THE massacre of innocents continues in the killing fields of Gaza, as most of the world looks away. Moreover, many ...
Afghan challenge
Updated 15 Jul, 2024

Afghan challenge

Foreign states must emphasise to the Afghan Taliban diplomatic recognition and trade relations all depend on greater counterterrorism efforts.
‘Complete’ justice
15 Jul, 2024

‘Complete’ justice

NOW that the matter of PTI’s reserved seats stands resolved, there are several equally pressing issues pertaining...
Drug fog
15 Jul, 2024

Drug fog

THE country has an old drug problem. While the menace has raged across divides of class and gender, successive ...