 You're watching Islamabad today for Think Tech Hawaii. I'm your host, Hamza Rifah Al-San. Today's topic is what's next for Imran Khan. And we're talking about Imran Khan, former prime minister, and in many ways, the most popular politician in the country, despite whatever happened on May the 9th, where you could say that sedition charges were actually laid on him, and that he could be trialed under a military court as well. I have with me journalist, Mr. Amir Zia. He has a keen eye on these developments, and he's gonna share insights on what would be next for the former prime minister and his party, as he looks to navigate this difficult political situation that he finds himself in. So, Mr. Amir Zia, thank you so much for joining me on the show. You're most welcome, and thank you very much for inviting me on your show. Thank you, Mr. Amir. So, let's start with the basic question here, which is, of course, the theme of this episode. What's next for Imran Khan, as he looks to navigate this difficult political landscape? Hamza, if you allow me, I'm not trying to deflect your question, but I would say that what's in store for Pakistan? Imran Khan is one of the players within our country, and the future of the country is now is in question, because everybody's unsure that whether elections will be held on time or not, what is in store for Pakistan on the economic front, and among the major political players. I mean, what is in store for the PDM? And when we break down the PDM, what is in store for PMLN or for people's party? And yes, Imran Khan is one of the major players. So I would say that everybody, if you start talking to the business people in Pakistan or analysts, they say the times are tough for the country, and the times are tough on two accounts. One, the economy is in shambles, and it's a huge challenge for us. So I would say that economic challenge is a big challenge for us, and at the same time, political instability is the second challenge for us, and both these challenges are feeding one another, to political uncertainty and all the instability it is feeding, it is wrecking our economy, and because of the bad economic situation, politics is going haywire. So this is the overall situation, which is very grim, very challenging for the state, for the government, and for all the political players. And among all those political players, there's one major player that is Imran Khan. So another question arises, I mean, whenever the next elections are held, I mean, number one, that we should not be doubting that election, whether elections will be held on time or not. But still in Pakistan, I mean, as you are based here now, so you can see that, I mean, many people are asking this question, the when will be the elections? Under the constitution, they should be sometime by November this year. So if the elections are held by November, then there's another question, will all the political players be allowed to participate in those elections in a free and fair manner? Will those elections will be free and fair? And connected to it is the fate of PTI and Imran Khan, that whether they'll be allowed to run in the elections or not, so these are some of the basic questions. And Imran Khan, of course, as a country faces a tough time, Imran Khan is also facing one of the toughest times of his career, betting under pressure, playing cricket under pressure is one thing, and doing politics in a third world, developing country under pressure is totally a different thing. Yes, Sanda. Absolutely, absolutely. So when we talk about the PTI in general, now we've seen the party's powers being clipped, most of the senior leadership has gone to defecting factions and obviously this new party, the Pakistan-Estaqam party is coming up. So when you review these mechanics, do you see the PTI retaining its vote bank? Should elections take place in November? If the election takes place and PTI is even allowed to run in those elections, I think that while the leadership, the first year leadership or the second year leadership of the party, it has fallen like a pack of cards. Yes, we all know that. But the vote bank, I believe, has hardened. So there can be two possibilities. One, if the PTI is allowed to run, so I mean, will they find candidates in each and every constituency? That is another major question. And if they find it, there's a scenario where there are no candidates for PTI. So what will that vote bank will do? Will it vote for people's party or IPP, the Estaqam, whatever the new name, Estaqam-Estaqam party, or newly, yeah. So whom they are going to vote for or will they take quite, they won't vote. So I mean, I have an apprehension if PTI is not allowed to run. The PTI hardened vote bank, they are not going to turn up, especially in the urban areas among the educated people because the PTI has mobilized a new kind of voters in the country. Those people who are apolitical before the emergence of the PTI. So that comprises a solid vote bank. Then there is youth who think that, you know, Imran Khan is the youngest, at least he's young at heart. So they are the ones, so they will be standing the solution. So I think that the hardened vote bank of PTI or the committed vote bank of PTI, they are not going to turn up if the PTI is not allowed to run. And in case the elections are held minus PTI. So then there'll be a question that about the legitimacy of the electoral exercise. This is one big question. And for another four, five years, there's a question of instability because you are keeping a major chunk of, you know, political power out of the electoral system. So that's again a very challenging situation for the country. Yes. Okay, okay. So when we talk about, do you see the possibility of Imran Khan being trialed under a military court? Which obviously the military court system has become extremely controversial internationally. We've seen assessments by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, which considers the entire concept of military courts to be inconsistent with basic human rights. In light of that, do you think that despite the pressure on not trialing him or not prosecuting him under the military court, it still remains a possibility given the situation? I think within the PDM and maybe within the establishment, there's a thinking that yes, Imran Khan should be tried by a military court. Okay. But I mean, this is going to create more problems because I mean, whether Imran Khan is punished or acquitted, even the trial itself will become controversial. It will become one of the biggest story of the world, a global story. If Imran Khan, you know, one-time national hero or former prime minister, he's been tried under the military court. So it's not going to get good marks for Pakistan. It's not good for the image of the country because yes, we claim that we are a democratic country. We are a country which says that we respect human rights. There are media freedoms. This is all the narrative which the government and the state tries to build. So if you put up very popular leader, you know, being tried under the military court, so it's going to create a controversy and the sympathy factor will of course go to, it will be with Imran Khan. But I would say that there are serious apprehensions that there can be a big move to disqualify Imran Khan through a military court or through a regular court or put him in jail for a long period. And some of the charges against him, they are quite, you know, comical. I mean, if somebody is accusing Imran Khan, the former prime minister, as being a terrorist, the country which has suffered the burnt of terrorism for more than, you know, two decades straight. And we have seen, you know, thousands of people losing their lives, thousands of security forces being killed and martyred. So here you are talking about, you want to try political activity with another politician under the same law or you want to try like that. So this is going to raise question both within the country and abroad. So I think, I mean, I hope that sanity prevails because I mean, let's look at the history. There have been three major. I mean, if you remember the Raval Pundi Saadish case, the Raval Pundi Kospiti case, 1951. Right? I mean, if there was a move within the army to topple the then government of La Patele Khan, where that trial occurred, the trial occurred and there are civilian criminals, right? Then there was a Hyderabad Kospiti case, which was against, again, against the nationalist leaders. What happened at that time? And at that time, more than 4,000, our soldiers and officers were martyred during the British Sun Insurgency. Again, it was tried under the civilian court, civilian criminal. Then again, we had the hijacking, famous hijacking case, former army chief's passenger plane was being diverted to India by former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. Again, where that case was tried? It was tried by under civilian court. So I think there is a, we have to make a distinction between a political activist politician with always a terrorist. I mean, for two years, the parliament and those people being tried under the military court. That was one of those people, one of those journalists who supported that idea because the terrorist, the black terrorist, black means the category where they play. TTP, for example. Exactly. So what they do is that they would pressurize the judge, they will threaten the witnesses, even the prosecution. So there was no way that they could be tried and convicted by a normal court. That was, it was a legitimate cause at that time. Pakistan was fighting a war on terror. Every Pakistani supported it. Most of the Pakistani supported it. But now the situation is totally different. You cannot try political prisoners or political activists, but you can face them like, treat them like TTP or al-Qaeda. Yes, Amir. Right, absolutely. So when we talk about this, it seems to me, if you look at the political situation paving out, when we talk about military courts being an extremely important variable in this entire equation, it's almost as if Nawaz Sharif or the former Prime Minister was disqualified in the Panama Papers case, there is this, the mechanics are built in a way that somehow he returns to Pakistan, has the right to appeal in front of the Supreme Court, while Imran Khan is delegitimized and disqualified and also labeled a terrorist. I mean, I've seen some, you mentioned the comical cases, there's something like 134 cases on him. And some of the comical statements by his opposition is to equate him with maybe TTP commanders who would actually attack military installations in the country. But do you see that this is more of a ploy by the PDM to try and give the soft corner for Nawaz Sharif to come back into the country, while Imran Khan is actually taken out of the political race? This is more political, rather than you could say legal, this entire way of prosecuting Imran Khan? I mean, the scenario which you are stating is very obvious and things are heading in that direction. Right. But my question is that, okay, if the PDM is able to implement its grand plan and the revival of Shiree family politics and their dynasty, the question is, I mean, how Pakistanis are going to take it? Maybe, I mean, by who can talk, you manage to push all these that agenda forward. But again, what has happened that our parliament during the last 14 months, whatever lawmaking they have done, they have done it for, all of the laws they've made are percent specific, including the latest law, where it seems that our parliament is working as a facilitator of the corrupt people, of the convicts, or those people who stand accused of corruption. Rather than thinking ways, how to get them convicted, yet trying to find ways, how to get them acquitted, or if they have been acquitted, they take them to get out of that, the grasp of the law. So I mean, it is very comical, it's very ironic, because I mean, there has been no lawmaking in Pakistan during the last 14 months, which is for pro people, for the workers, for the peasants, for journalists, for the students, no, for middle class, working class, there's been no single lawmaking. They changed the NAV laws that was to facilitate the corrupt, or those people who stand accused of massive corruption, right? And again, the judicial laws they tried to change, again, they were to dilute, or to what you say, to blend the bite of the judiciary. And again, the third law, which is through which they want, Nawaz Sharif is back, and they're going in the path that are giving him the right to appeal. So already that case stands close. He has appealed, and that appeal has been rejected. He's been a result of it. So I mean, that's what they are doing. So they are making a farce of the entire legal system of Pakistan. You know, there's a one set of laws for the privileged few, for the 0.0001% Pakistani, because NAV laws are not my problem. They're not the problem of the ordinary Pakistan. Of course. So is these laws, which they have just trained to help Nawaz Sharif or Janki Tariq. So I mean, it is a mockery of constitution. It is a mockery of legal system of Pakistan. So may God help us? I mean, I can already say that. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. So speaking specifically about, I mean, I can go back into retrospect and we could say that the moment the PDM government came into power, they tried to pass laws that could actually, you know, clip the powers of the National Accountability Bureau and their ability to actually prosecute them. But don't you feel it's ironic that the very same National Accountability Bureau is trying to, you could say, hunt down Imran Khan, particularly in the case of his recent arrest because he was in the premises of the fort. He was actually appearing before the fort. And then the Supreme Court ruled that any, you could say, arrest within the premises of the court of law is considered to be illegal and unconstitutional. But then Mr. Ahmed, the human cry that came from the opposition that the Supreme Court is actually favoring Imran Khan, do you think there are any merits to that argument? Or again, it's just another political statement. I would say that it is another political statement because I mean, there's only one institution which was standing against this, all the mechanics for mechanization what they were doing trying to, you know, change the constitution or not implement the constitution. They, I mean, PDM, while saying that they abide by the constitution, they were working against the spirit of the constitution. The constitution is very clear that once the provincial assembly or any assembly gets dissolved, election must be held within 90 days. So I mean, here we see that the basic parameters of constitution were not being implemented. And it is not the way Imran Khan alone was arrested. I mean, yes, arresting anyone from the court premises is a questionable thing. But I mean, but the way he was pushed, the way he was, you know, showed by the security personnel. And even, I mean, was there a need to break the glasses and the way he was, after all, formed a prime minister? I mean, we have seen arrest. I mean, during my 30 years of career, more than 30 years of career, I've seen many arrests of politicians. The police goes on the security personnel, they'll say, come, sir, come with us. They will allow him to, you know, pack his suitcase or attache. And then they take him in a white manner. But here, what is happening, the brave Punjab police of Pakistan, wherever they go for a, you know, the conduct rate or arrest a person, what they do, they break and smash the glasses of the vehicle. They break the furniture. They break the TV sets. I mean, why? I mean, they could, I mean, of course, we are not saying we are not defending the corrupt people. If I mean, they stand accused of corruption or for any other illegal action, they should be arrested. But there's a way to arrest people. You cannot start threatening women. You cannot start beating children. You cannot start, you know, terrorizing the entire neighborhood and the entire family. And that's what they've done. And this is being done. And now there are footages of each and every arrest. I mean, you go, I mean, it seems that every house where the brave Punjab police has entered, they have just ransacked it. Absolutely. First footage on Twitter, this footage on Facebook, there's footage everywhere. And, you know, the way women have been treated is absolutely, you know, it's a travesty for justice because frankly speaking, the dignity of the household and the dignity of the person is being brazenly violated under the caretaker, Chief Minister Mohsin Nakwik. True. But because I mean, and that has also made the role of the caretaker government questionable. Because I mean, yes, there were apprehensions that this caretaker government is not neutral. And they've proved by their action that they are not neutral. I mean, if Dousa raised about a person, he should try to act in moderation. He should try to act under the law, abide by the constitution. But here we see an unelected person, the way he's using the administration and the police, and then there's a questionable role of the police itself. I mean, why they are abiding by those illegal orders. So, I mean, we say that, yes, arrest, if somebody has committed a crime, please go ahead and arrest him. But, you know, treat him in a dignified manner. And we are not saying that, you know, that you start, you throw them in prison and people keep searching for the arrested person for days and weeks. I mean, still you know that, I mean, they're journalists who are missing. Yes. I mean, Raun Raaz's case is just, I mean, I have to say this. Yeah, it's absolutely fascinating in a way that you just cannot locate where he is. I mean, we knew for a fact that, you know, Archduchery eventually ended up in Kenya. And, you know, the entire, I mean, I would argue, and maybe you would endorse us that this entire, the mechanics of it was, you know, built in Pakistan before he actually went to Kenya. But if you take a look at where Raun Raaz is, I mean, most of the courts have even said that we don't know his whereabouts. So, this is just, this is just unbelievable. Exactly, everybody is disowning his arrest. And the second thing is that, I mean, against journalists, you can have two cases, defamation and libel case. And you can take them to high court, supreme court, try as much as there's no harm in it. I mean, journalists should be open for that. If I report, if I mis-support something, if I make false allegations, yes, the victim has all the rights to take me to court. So, I mean, Imran Raaz, if he has, you know, heard the feelings of someone, he has mis-supported anything, please take him to the court, but at least take him to the court. I mean, that's what we are saying. Yeah, but he's not in the court, is he? I mean, it's almost as if he's in, you know, isolated cells somewhere. I mean, just to put in a humorous tinge to this, maybe in somewhere in the isolated district of Balochistan, we don't know where he is. And that raises questions about the credibility of the justice system in this country. Exactly, and, you know, it has always been controversial in Pakistan, but I think during the last 14 months, I've been really fatal. I don't think so, that, I mean, ever before, I don't remember, even during Pariz Musharraf period, it was a British army. And there was a movement by the journalists, but I mean, they were not treated like that. Yes, they were harassed. They were thrown into a, you know, lock up in 2007. I'm talking about 2007 and eight, but I mean, people knew that was happening. And I think this government, I mean, the way it is operating, it is the most brutal in my living memory, they haven't never seen it like this. And I see a continuation of the PML and policies, because what we believe, when he was in power for the second time, that was in 98, well, if you remember, you can, you know, talk to seniors that a journalist like, I don't say it, he was now in the PML and camp. He was arrested. He was kidnapped. I mean, there was a demand from the big publishing houses to sack editors. The biggest group at that time, the Junk Group, they were publishing the news and Junk newspaper on two pages. That I'm talking about 98, 99. Yeah, 98. And there was a long list at 98, that they wanted Malia Lodi to be sacked and some other journalists to be sacked from the Junk Group. And for that, they went, you know, they resorted to high-handed actions. In 2015, again, there was a new group that was being launched, Gold Media Group. Again, it was targeted. And the wait was closed during the pretext of a New York Times post. Again, it was a questionable thing, because without proving the gift, you cannot punish and close a business, a legitimate business. That's what they've done. And now again, the third time. I mean, look, I mean, the way Achachiri was threatened and finally he was martyred under very prestigious circumstances. Pakistan, I mean, imagine a person like Achachiri had to flee the country. I mean, Achachiri was our poster boy of the fifth generation war. He was- He was an excellent investigative journalist as well. I mean, he was an excellent investigative journalist. Yeah. Exactly. Great investigative journalist. So if it would happen to Achachiri, if he was a high-profile journalist. Yes. Right. And then there are many others. I mean, who have been silenced, who are very cautious. I mean, how to speak, what to write, what not to write. So things have changed rather than, you know, ensuring a freedom of press get forward. We are going on a backward direction. Right, right. Yes. It's very unfortunate. I was just coming across the ISPR statement just recently. I mean, just came about 15 to 20 minutes ago, where they basically categorically stated that any attack on the military installation would not be tolerated and the army would take all the steps necessary to try and make sure that any political party, political actor or political activist involved would be prosecuted. So if we talk about the status of the military establishment, I mean, there's a lot of talk about its neutrality and its lack of meddling in political affairs. Do you think that really is the case based on your own analysis? Because most journalists would claim that, yes, they are neutral. Most would claim that they're not neutral. So what is your take on that? So first of all, we have to, you know, realize that in any developing country, establishment always has a role. So I'm one of those people, I mean, there's a very lopsided discussion that's about civilian supremacy. And we know that civilian institutions are weak over here. So I mean, people like me always say that our military leadership and the civilian leadership, they have to work in tandem and support one another. That is the best possible scenario for Pakistan, where are both the civilian and military leadership, they are pushing the country in the same direction. That's the way forward for the country right now. And of course, because there's a historical baggage for Pakistan where military leadership or the institution of the military, they have more power. I mean, when at the time of partition, we inherited a bigger military and a smaller financial base. I mean, it's all documented. So from the day one, it was lopsided, right? And again, we wanted to run our democracy in a country which was, you know, feudal tribal, right? And with the middle class was very small and the industrial revolution was nowhere to be seen. So I mean, that's why we had a flawed democracy. And that's why we kept interfering because our political parties institutions were weak. And it is very wrong to compare that, you know, Pakistan and India, they both vote on freedom in the same year, the same day. But the problem is that India comprised the more advanced, you know, parts of British India. While Pakistan comprised the backward parts of British India, we only had one city that was Lahore, right? Karachi was a small town, Bengal, East Pakistan without Calcutta was a ruler's swim. So I mean, so there was no grand basis for, you know, to establish democracy over here. So that's why India had a head start because all the institutions were there. The parliament was there. Even the political party Congress, it was there. Here, the, you know, Muslim League had to be, you know, repositioned from a minority province to the majority province. That's a good point. The evolution is totally different. So the evolution is very different. So I'm not one of those who say that, you know, that it's sort of a conspiracy of the military that they interfered. It was, there were some objective conditions. There were mistakes submitted by the civilian leadership. They were, so that's why we see where we are now. So going forward, I mean, the unfortunate part is that institutions like military, they should not be made controversial. And here's every political party has done its bit to make them controversial. And we want, you know, every political pair want military on their side, whether it's People's Party, PTI, Noomar, Nawaz League, PML, and you name any political party. They all want military support. So military then has, you know, the choices to make. So let's accept that those facts. So, I mean, PTI, I think Imran, who had been part of the power metrics of Pakistan, or the PTI itself, they should know the limits, you know, how to deal. I mean, to open which front is important and which front is not important, unimportant. So maybe, I mean, they might have grievances with the army, but I mean, the way they tried to pull them in, in this political tussle. So it has went against them. Just imagine till May 8th, PTI was seem unconquerable, was, you know, it was flying high. But I mean- The polls suggest that it was like rocketing 70% to 75% PTI. And believe me, I mean, whether one supports PTI or one opposes PTI, one has to accept that after 9th May, they couldn't be business as usual on part of the establishment. Yeah. I mean, that was there. I mean, they were pushed in that direction. I mean, rather if they had, who has those discussions, those demonstrations outside Jati Umrah or some, you know, Punjab Assembly or Governor House, that would have made more sense. So I would say that PTI overplayed its cards. So it created problem for itself. And I would say, I'm one of those persons who say that PTI is not anti-establishment in its DNA. PTI has the most pro-establishment political party we have. Yeah, they have a history of that, right? They have a history of that. It is in their DNA. I mean, now there are workers and their supporters that are acting like jitter-lovers, right? I mean, that is kind of, I would say the division between them. Yes, we know about the people's party. Yes, they have a strong history of being anti-establishment. Damashree was a strong anti-establishment. He came in power's size. All the three times we had differences with the military leadership. And that's why he was ousted. So here we have PTI, because still we have to know, I mean, what grand sin or crime Imran Khan committed that he was ousted like this? I mean, about Damashree, there was a total narrative was built that he was pro-Mudi ones and all sort of charges. I'm not really... He undermined the Kashmir cause. He undermined the Kashmir cause. I mean, these were the stories which were being shared with the media that he undermined the Kashmir cause. Another story which was very interesting, by the way, it was, you know, this big buy. It was actually accused. It was an accusation by the PTI, which suggested that Nawaz Sharif was going ahead with sedition by claiming that the Pakistan judicial system did not prosecute, you know, the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks, which is very interesting because he was not necessarily backing the own judicial system. And he says that, well, there's no humanity in Pakistan. They should have handed over the perpetrators to India. So, I mean, when you talk about that, that does amount to sedition charges if you take it from, you know, the basic definition of what that constitutes. Exactly, exactly, exactly. So, I mean, here we have to know, I mean, appointing Buzhar was a bone of contention, we all know. But I mean, that is a political issue. I mean, it is not... I can't say that it becomes a core, core issue for differences. So, we have to yet know the detail. At least, I don't know those details because I'm sitting in Karachi. That's why, I mean, what was the last straw which broke the camel's back? So, we have to know about that. But saying that, I mean, I would say that PTI is still, I would say the first establishment political party and the establishment should not try to, you know, maybe the people in the government, they want PTI and there should be a full-blown escalation between a popular political force. Confrontation. Most political, political force and the most organized and different institutions that they should be pitted once against each other. That is not a good scenario. As a Pakistani, I feel sad about it because I mean, no political party, not just PTI. No political party should be standing against the army and the army should not be standing against any other political party. So, army has a very important role to play in our scheme of things and they should continue doing that and, you know, trying to stabilize the country, trying to end the political uncertainty. Even they are trying to help our economy now. So all these things are good, but at the same time, those political tensions, they need to be lowered now. The politics of, you know, concentration and the uncertainty, that needs to be changed. But I mean, they may be six months down the road or you can drag on for another year or so, but eventually it will come down. Sense will prevail, inshallah. Hopefully, inshallah. So, Mr. Amizah, thank you so much for joining me on the show. It's been a pleasure talking to you. Same here, thank you. All right, so that's all that we have for now on Think Tech Hawaii. This is Islamabad today. I was your host, Hamza Rifah. Sand, you can follow us on our social media pages and do give us your feedback. So next time, take care. Thank you so much for watching Think Tech Hawaii. If you like what we do, please click the like and subscribe button on YouTube. You can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn. Check out our website, thinktechhawaii.com. Mahalo.