Opinion

Policing and the right to protest

Published

2 years ago

2022/11/14

by Muhammad Amir Rana

IT appears as if Imran Khan has deliberately slowed down the pace of his party’s ‘long march’ on Islamabad. But the challenge of providing security to the protestors and maintaining law and order has been mounting for the law enforcers, especially after an assassination attempt on Mr Khan injured the former prime minister. As things stand now, the federal capital has been placed on high alert. The PTI governments in Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Azad Kashmir denied help to the Islamabad administration, mainly on political grounds, making the task of the Islamabad Police gruelling and complicated.

Alternatively, Islamabad Police requested Sindh Police and the FC to assist it in maintaining law and order in the capital during the PTI demonstrations. The PTI workers had blocked all major highways of KP and Punjab leading towards Islamabad, thus making commuting very hard in Islamabad, with life coming to a virtual standstill.

The PTI is not halting life in the federal capital for the first time; nor is it the first political party using coercive measures for its political demands. Almost all political and religious parties have used this tactic in recent times. However, it has been the Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan whose protests yielded something for it in the end. Though the TLP leadership complains that the state institutions did not fully honour their commitments, many of its demands were, in fact, fully or partially fulfilled.

The PTI has a long history of protests, but as compared to the TLP, its cadre has remained less violent, despite the fact that its followers appear very charged. One probable reason is that the PTI chairman uses the protests only to build pressure on state institutions and keeps motivating its support base in this regard. However, frequent or prolonged demonstrations have multiple implications. They not only lead the country to a protracted political crisis but also affect the economy and state business, besides disturbing the cycle of daily life.

‘Public order’ is a tricky term and can be interpreted in many ways.

Whenever such a situation arises in Islamabad, it triggers a debate about the legality of the protests and their political and security-related dimensions. Recently, Justice Qazi Faez Isa of the Supreme Court made important remarks regarding the closure of roads during protests, saying that the right to freedom of expression cannot be exercised by affecting the fundamental rights of fellow citizens. He observed that the state is not only responsible for facilitating the demonstrations, but its foremost responsibility is to protect the fundamental rights of every citizen.

Indeed, this is a critical observation in accordance with Article 16 of the Constitution, which gives every citizen the “right to assemble peacefully and without arms, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the public interest”. However, maintaining public order during a political crisis is a multifold challenge.

Ensuring public order is a core responsibility of the district administration, and it can deny permission for a demonstration if a party fails to satisfy the administration. The parties often challenge district administration decisions in the courts and get relief in most instances.

In November 2019, the Islamabad High Court observed that a peaceful protest staged by unarmed persons is a constitutionally protected right. In extraordinary and exceptional circumstances, the state can only restrain a person from exercising their right to protest on the grounds of national security. The blockade of the roads is not unlawful in many countries, including India. Interestingly, a supreme court bench in India had given a similar verdict on a petition seeking the removal from the roads of farmers protesting the controversial farm laws in 2020. The court had restrained itself from interfering with the protest in question while observing that “‘there can certainly be no impediment in the exercise of such rights as long as it is non-violent and does not damage the life and properties of other citizens”.

However, the courts in India and Pakistan categorically avoid defining the public order enshrined in their respective constitutions. For example, the Islamabad High Court had recently directed the Capital Police to continue its actions as per the law, in line with the long march call given by the PTI. Law-enforcement departments can interpret it according to the circumstances and open the door for political considerations.

‘Public order’ is a tricky term and can be interpreted in many ways. In the Pakistani context, the police and local administration often use brute force to disperse peaceful protests of teachers, farmers, young doctors and nurses; they do not even spare demonstrations held by those who are visually challenged. The best excuse they have is that the protestors use force to disrupt the public order. However, they react differently whenever religious and political parties launch demonstrations. The religious parties appear more privileged in that regard as local administrations become very confused while dealing with their protests.

Apart from the long history of violent and non-violent political and religious movements in the country, the establishment has remained important for provoking and supporting certain protest movements. It has used both religious and political parties to destabilise governments, which then went out of their control, or to facilitate certain narratives for national and international purposes.

In such cases, policing becomes a complex challenge, and police commands hesitate to fulfil their legal obligations. The civilian governments also use police in such cases as is happening now; the Punjab and KP Police are reluctant to extend their support to the Islamabad Police. The police in the capital are trying to handle the situation alone.

A depoliticised police force is often recommended as the only solution to all internal security challenges, including maintaining public order in times of political turmoil. Such a police force is a long-awaited dream in Pakistan, but neither the government nor the establishment nor judiciary have taken the issue seriously. The police are merely a cushion between them and the masses, and must be held responsible for their failures.

(The Dawn/ANN)
The writer is a security analyst.

All News Advertisement

Opinion

LG polls, what a waste of money!

Published

3 days ago

2025/03/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

If the people of this country were asked whether they want elections to the local government, majority of them would say no! How many years have elapsed since the local councils became defunct? And did not the country function without these councils that were labelled as ‘white elephants’?

If the present government’s wish is to do the will of the people, they should reconsider having local government elections. This way the government will not only save a considerable amount of money on holding elections, but also save even a greater amount by not having to maintain these local councils, which have become a bane on the country’s economy.

One would hope that the country will be able to get rid of these local councils and revert back to the days of having competent Government Agents and a team of dedicated government officials been tasked with the responsibility of attending to the needs of the people in those areas.

M. Joseph A. Nihal Perera

Opinion

What not to do

Published

4 days ago

2025/03/12

Sahan Weerasooriya

Trump and Zelensky arguing in the White House

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

It is immaterial whether you like him or not but one thing is crystal clear; Donald Trump has shown, very clearly, who is the boss. Surely, presidents of two countries are equal; perhaps, that is the impression Volodymyr Zelensky had when he went to the White House to meet Trump but the hard reality, otherwise, would have dawned on him with his inglorious exit! True, the behaviour of President Trump and VP Vance were hardly praiseworthy but Zelensky did what exactly he should not do. Afterall, he was on a begging mission and beggars cannot be choosers! He behaved like professional beggars in Colombo who throw money back when you give a small amount!!

Despite the risk of belonging to the minority, perhaps of non-Americans, I must say that I quite like Trump and admire him as a straight-talking politician. He keeps to his words; however atrocious they sound! Unfortunately, most critics overlook the fact that what Trump is doing is exactly what he pledged during his election campaign and that the American voters elected him decisively. When he lost to Biden, all political commentators wrote him off, more so because of his refusal to admit defeat and non-condemnation of his supporters who rioted. When he announced his intention to contest, it only evoked pundits’ laughter as they concluded that the Republican Party would never nominate him. Undaunted, Trump got the party to rally round him and won a non-consecutive second term; a feat achieved only once before, by Grover Cleveland around the end of the nineteenth century. His victory, against all predictions, was more decisive as he got more collegiate votes and, even though it does not matter, won the popular vote too which he did not get when he got elected the first term. Even his bitterest critics should accept this fact.

Zelensky was elected the president of Ukraine after the elected pro-Soviet president was deposed by a ‘peoples revolution’ engineered by the EU with the support of USA. After this, the EU attempted to bring Ukraine to NATO, disregarding the Munich agreement which precipitated the Russian invasion. He should have realised that, if not for the air-defence system which Trump authorised for Ukraine during his first term, Russian invasion would have been complete. It may well be that he was not aware as when this happened Zelensky may still have been the comedian acting the part of the president! Very likely, Trump was referring to this when he accused Zelensky of being ungrateful.

Zelensky also should have remembered that he disregarded requests from Trump, after his defeat by Biden, to implicate Biden’s son in some shady deals in Ukraine and that one of the last acts of Biden was to pardon his son and grant immunity to cover the alleged period. Perhaps, actions of the European leaders who embrace him every time they see him, as a long-lost brother, and invitations to address their parliaments has induced an element of the superiority complex in Zelensky that he behaved so combative.

Trump wanted to be the mediator to stop the war and spoke to Putin first. Instead of waiting for Trump to speak to him, egged on by EU leaders Zelensky started criticising Trump for not involving him in the talks. His remark “He should be on our side” demonstrated clearly that Zelensky had not understood the role of a mediator. His lack of political experience was the major reason for the fiasco in the White House and the subsequent actions of Trump clearly showed Zelensky where he stands! PM Starmer and President Macron seem to have given some sensible advice and he seems to be eating humble pie. In the process Trump has ensured that the European nations pay for their defence than piggy-backing on the US, which I am sure would please the American voter. By the way, though Macron talks big about defence France spends less than 2% of GDP. Trump seems vindicated. Of course, Trump could be blamed for being undiplomatic but he can afford to be as he has the upper hand!

Ranil on Al Jazeera

Zelensky has shown what not to do: instead of being diplomatic being aggressive when you need favours! Meanwhile, Ranil has shown what not to do when it comes to TV interviews. God only knows who advised him, and why, for him to go ‘Head to Head’ with Mehdi Hasan on Al-Jazeera. Perhaps, he wanted to broadcast to the world that he was the saviour of Sri Lanka! The experienced politician he is, one would have expected Ranil to realise that he would be questioned about his role in making Sri Lanka bankrupt as well, in addition to raising other issues.

The interview itself was far from head to head; more likely heads to head! It turned out to be an inquisition by Tiger supporters and the only person who spoke sense being Niraj Deva, who demonstrated his maturity by being involved in British and EU politics. The worst was the compere who seems keen to listen his own voice, reminding me of a Sinhala interviewer on a YouTube channel whose interviews I have stopped watching!

Ranil claims, after the interview was broadcast, that it had been heavily edited reduced from a two-hour recording. Surely, despite whatever reason he agreed to, he should have laid ground rules. He could have insisted on unedited broadcast or his approval before broadcast, if it was edited. It was very naïve of Ranil to have walked in to a trap for no gain. Though his performance was not as bad as widely reported, he should have been more composed at the beginning as he turned out to be later. Overall, he gave another opportunity for the Tiger rump and its supporters to bash Sri Lanka, unfortunately.

Medhi Hasan should watch some of David Frost interviews, especially the one with Richard Nixon, and learn how to elicit crucial information in a gentle exploratory manner than shouting with repeated interruptions. He does not seem to think it is necessary to give time for the interviewee to respond to his questions. I will never watch Al-Jazeera’s “Head to Head” again!

Ranil’s best was his parting shot; when asked by Hasan whether he would contest the next presidential election, he said “No, I will retire and watch Al-Jazeera and hope to see you better mannered”!

Opinion

Ajahn Brahm to visit SL in May 2025

Published

5 days ago

2025/03/11

Sahan Weerasooriya

The Ajahn Brahm Society of Sri Lanka (ABSSL) is pleased to announce that Ajahn Brahm will be visiting Sri Lanka for a short stay in May this year. Many, both Buddhists and non-Buddhists, know him and have listened to his addresses made on earlier visits, including his 2023 public talk at the BMICH, which was attended by over 4,000 people.

Ajahn Brahmavamso, popularly known as Ajahn Brahm, is the Head Abbot of Bodhinyana Monastery in Serpentine, Perth. He was a pupil of the famous Thai forest monk Ajahn Chah, considered the best Theravada meditation teacher in the last century. By his own choice, Ajahn Brahmavamso shortened his name and was extra pleased that the initials represent the major religions of the world. He is renowned world-wide as an outstanding meditation bhikkhu, teacher and instructor, guiding thousands of practitioners.

As in previous visits, Ajahn Brahm’s schedule will be packed with addresses, meetings with senior professionals, business leaders, and researchers. This year, a special session has been included for teenagers and young adults.

The agenda planned for him includes:

Public address at the BMICH to all irrespective of religion and age; then to a younger audience.

· Exclusive Leadership Forum for senior professionals and business leaders.

· Forum with academics engaged in research at the Centre for Meditation Research, University of Colombo.

· A week-long meditation retreat for the Ven Sangha and experienced lay meditators.

Public Addresses

The public addresses will be on Sunday, May 18, 2025, from 7:00 am to 11:00 am, at the BMICH Main Hall and Sirimavo Halls; Ajahn Brahm moving from one hall to another so the entire audience sees him. Each hall will be well equipped with audio and video presentation. The first address: The Art of Meaningful Living, is designed for all, age notwithstanding, offering wisdom and practical insights for a fulfilling life. The second: Coping with Life Transitions and Emotional Challenges, is a special session tailored for teens and young adults, addressing key challenges faced by them in today’s fast-paced, competitive world. Both talks will be in English, with concise translation to Sinhala by Ven Damita Thera.

Exclusive Forums

On Saturday, May 17, 2025, two exclusive forums will be held at the BMICH Committee Room, Jasmine Hall. The first such session will be with eighty invited Sri Lankan academics and scientists engaged in research on meditation at the Centre for Meditation Research of the University of Colombo. This will be followed in the evening by an interactive session for a hundred invited senior professionals and business leaders, featuring a talk on leadership followed by a Q&A session.

Meditation Retreat

The most significant item on Ajahn Brahm’s programme will be a week-long meditation retreat at the Barberyn Waves Ayurveda Resort in Weligama. Focus is intended to be on the fifty members of the Ven Sangha. A limited number of experienced lay meditators will also have the opportunity to participate.

Participation & Registration

Those interested in attending the public talks at the BMICH are kindly advised to register at to secure free passes. For further information, please contact the Ajahn Brahm Society of Sri Lanka at .