TLP ban

The federal Cabinet solemnly acceded to the Punjab government’s proscription of the Tehreek Labbaik Pakistan under the Anti-Terrorism Act, but observers could not escape a sense of déjà vu, as the TLP has been banned a second time, the first ban having been lifted. There are already 82 organizations proscribed under Schedule 1 of the ATA, including a mixed bag of sectarian organizations and AJK, Sindhi and Baloch separatist outfits. The common factor is that they all propagate their beliefs by violence. While the TLP does not propagate violence as such, there is a miasma of violence surrounding it, It was proscribed in 2021 after violent protests in which protesters were killed. The ban was lifted after six months, after the TLP promised to eschew violence. The Punjab government, which pressed for the ban, argued that the TLP had reneged on its guarantees. The PM Office a, which has been something of a favoured child, is a sectarian party, and while other sectarian partiesgreed, noting that violent protests and rallies by the TLP had led to the killing of security personnel and innocent bystanders.

The TLP is a sectarian party, and its banning places it alongside other sectarian parties. However, it also raises issues of the intersection of freedom of speech and religious belief. PM’s Political Affairs Adviser Rana Sanaullah has said that the aim was not to eliminate the party but to purge it of terrorist and anti-state elements. However, the ban seems a lot like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Is the state unable to identify the terrorists and anti-state elements within the TLP, and prosecute them accordingly. The problem seems to be when anyone, sectarian or separatist, attempts to impose ideas forcibly. The use of force in imposing ideas cannot be tolerated by any state, and it seems that the TLP has crossed that line. The TLP was conducting protests against the Israeli genocide in Gaza. Presumably the intent was not to protect against that genocide.

The government should also refrain from any action misusing the ATA to penalize parties which might oppose it. Freedom of speech issues usually end up with the government going after opponents. This should not be left to happen in this casde. At the smae time, bans should be taken seriously. They should not be reduced to a mere tactic, with the party affected dismissing the ban as something that can be reversed by mouthing the right formulae.