From taking credit for a self-styled people’s uprising of sorts, to claiming ignorance about the identity of the rioters to downright calling it a false flag operation, the Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaaf has taken all possible positions on the events of 9th May. However, it had settled on that last one since some time now, as could be attested by the party leadership’s distancing itself from most of the activists currently incarcerated by the authorities.
The competing theory by the PTI’s detractors was that it was an attempted coup. That the party was relying on sympathetic officers from within the military to switch sides when they saw the tide turning.
The ISPR’s press conference seems to have taken the wind out of the sails of the erstwhile ruling party’s sails by endorsing its detractors’ theory in the only way that mattered: by kicking out members of the higher brass. The army has sacked a Lieutenant General, amongst several other senior military officers. This is serious, and though there could be a slight difference of opinion on whether this is unprecedented, there is none on how incredibly rare it is.
And it doesn’t stop there. Politics are a family affair in a lot of democracies, but in our neck of the woods, the judiciary, civil service and military also have their fair share of influence by families, with the wives of some senior officers holding an incredible sway. To that end, another message has also been sent. The military’s spokesman made it clear that a granddaughter of a retired four-star general and a son-in-law of a retired four-star general have also been arrested in connection with the probe into May 9 riots. Moreover, a wife of a retired three-star general and a wife and son-in-law of a retired two-star general are also being investigated.
The army is calling it a ‘self-accountability process.’ That is all well and good. But there are several questions that need to be asked. The army prides itself on running a tight ship; has that pride diminished if the co-conspirators of an alleged attempted coup had reached such senior ranks in the military?
Second, and this is far more important, almost by its very definition, there can be no actual accountability if it is prefaced only by “self.” There has to be external scrutiny. At a time when the issue of civilians being tried by military courts is being discussed, this might sound idealistic but actually, even military officers being tried by military courts need to be open to civilian oversight. Are the officers discussed in the press conference guilty of criminal negligence, knowing acquiescence or downright active insurgents? There has to be more transparency about these things. In this opacity, there is no way we can be sure such an incident, as the army claims it has, won’t happen again.
