Ban hammer

Published October 8, 2024

THE decision to ban the PTM under the Anti-Terrorism Act is yet another ill-advised move by the state. Although the government has said the movement poses a threat to national security, many see the decision as an attempt to suppress dissent. History has shown that such heavy-handed moves fail to achieve their desired goals. Rather than quelling unrest, they often exacerbate tensions, pushing marginalised groups further away from the state. If the government has concrete allegations against the PTM or any individuals associated with it, there should be transparent legal proceedings against the suspected lawbreakers. Proscribing the group will only alienate the community that supports it. The fact that two PTM-associated members were elected to parliament without the PTM label is a telling example of how the movement cannot be diminished through repressive actions. It is not the PTM name that resonates with the people, but the issues the movement has highlighted. Targeting it in such a manner will only exacerbate the anger and sense of marginalisation felt by its supporters. In fact, this move could push more people into the arms of radical elements who thrive on state-induced resentment.

Moreover, conflating a rights-based movement with violent terrorist groups is counterproductive. The state must realise that these actions, far from restoring order, will only result in more tension. Over the years, the Pakhtun population has voiced concerns about neglect and discrimination, alleged state violence and enforced disappearances. The PTM served as one avenue through which these grievances were being articulated. By banning it, the government is silencing voices that operated within the constitutional framework. This is not only unjust, it is short-sighted. Instead of bans and violent crackdowns — as was witnessed recently with the dismantling of a protest camp in Khyber — the government should be focusing on addressing the root causes of discontent. The issues of missing persons, alleged state violence, and the lack of political representation need to be resolved through dialogue and reforms. In the same vein, the PTM must hear out state institutions’ objections about the way it conducts its politics. Delegitimising a group through bans has never been a solution, and it never will be. If the state genuinely seeks peace and stability, it must listen to the concerns of the people, rather than stifle their voices.

Published in Dawn, October 8th, 2024

Opinion

Editorial

The way forward
Updated 12 May, 2025

The way forward

An out-of-the-box solution acceptable to Pakistan, India and the Kashmiris is the only hope for long-term peace in South Asia.
AI opportunity
12 May, 2025

AI opportunity

TIME is running out. According to the latest Human Development Report, published by the UNDP this past Tuesday,...
Ace mountaineer
12 May, 2025

Ace mountaineer

NINE summits, five to go. Sajid Ali Sadpara’s quest to fulfil his late father’s dream and elevate Pakistan’s...
Hostilities cease, at last
Updated 11 May, 2025

Hostilities cease, at last

It is Islamabad and New Delhi that will have to do the heavy lifting thesmselves to secure peace.
Second IMF tranche
11 May, 2025

Second IMF tranche

THE IMF board’s approval of the second tranche of its ongoing $7bn funding arrangement and a new climate ...
War and lies
Updated 10 May, 2025

War and lies

Media on this side of the border is also not above blame.