Ban hammer

Published
0

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

Muddled hierarchy
Updated 15 Nov, 2026

Muddled hierarchy

The jurisdiction of the two courts and a mechanism for settling disputes between them should be spelt out in law, not left to judges to fight over.
Growing crisis
15 Nov, 2026

Growing crisis

AN emergency can be judged by the speed with which it draws an effective response. The National Population Council’s...
Organised rackets
15 Nov, 2026

Organised rackets

ON the International Day against Transnational Organised Crime, observed today, Pakistan finds itself in a tight...
Referendum talk
Updated 14 Nov, 2026

Referendum talk

Unless the PPP is deliberately using Sindh as a bargaining chip, it should issue a clarification with a clear, consistent position on new administrative units, not one tailored to protect its home turf.
Mineral wealth
Updated 14 Nov, 2026

Mineral wealth

Minerals should not be presented as a solution to Pakistan’s long-term economic difficulties. The aim should be to build an industrial base rather than export raw materials.
Late diagnosis
14 Nov, 2026

Late diagnosis

AS we mark World Diabetes Day today, Pakistan faces a troubling question: how many people are living with diabetes...