JUI(F) chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman and PPP co-chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari have both come out in support of the PTI taking part in the coming general election. However, both also supported the holding accountable of those responsible for the May 9 incidents. This is a convergence of positions from the earlier divergence of the two parties on the holding of elections. While the JUI(F) is willing to go along with the over-stepping of the constitutional limit of 90 days, Mr Zardari has come out in public with the demand that the limit be adhered to. Incidentally, the PPP seems divided on this issue, with some not so sure that delimitations should not come first. Both the Maulana and Mr Zardari could be seen taking principled stands. Where the Maulana stressed that he would not ‘kick a man when he is down’, Mr Zardari expressed readiness to talk to the PTI before elections, showing that the doors of dialogue can never be closed in politics.
However, their explicit support for accountability for the May 9 attacks also displayed another trait of democracy: that matters could not be taken into one’s own hands. An essential part of the dialogue between the political parties and the establishment about the latter’s role in politics must be about how to protest decisions with which one does not agree. May 9 could serve as an object lesson in what not to do: burning down military installations is not an option, nor is it the job of a political party to take on an armed force, no matter what its provocation. The PPP suffered the trauma of its leader being hanged, and one party worker burnt himself to death in protest, but no attacks on military installations were carried out, even though the hanging was carried out by a martial law government. May 9 took place only because the PTI wanted to protest its leader being merely arrested.
However, the PTI does represent a large section of the population; whether it represents the majority can only be tested at the hustings. Keeping it away from that test may suit other parties, but cannot suit the nation. In the end, accountability for May 9 can only come at the ballot box for the party; the courts may deal with individuals, but that does not mean that any party should be kept away from the poll.
