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

Another U-turn?
Updated 07 Oct, 2022

Another U-turn?

The PTI’s decision to take back its resignations could herald a twist in the tussle playing out in Islamabad.
Renewed TTP threat
07 Oct, 2022

Renewed TTP threat

THE interior ministry’s call for ‘extreme vigilance’ and instructions to security forces to conduct ‘search...
Women’s gala in GB
07 Oct, 2022

Women’s gala in GB

REGRESSIVE forces, once again, nearly had their way — this time in Gilgit-Baltistan. A three-day sporting gala for...
‘Draconian’ law
06 Oct, 2022

‘Draconian’ law

THE debate over what it means to be ‘sadiq’ and ‘ameen’ has reignited after the incumbent Supreme Court ...
Welcome clarity
Updated 06 Oct, 2022

Welcome clarity

There needs to be consensus amongst all political actors that matters of governance should be the exclusive domain of civilians.
Car purchases
06 Oct, 2022

Car purchases

IF we are in the market to buy a new car, we end up paying a significantly large amount as premium over the sticker...