Toxic politics

Former CJP Qazi Faez Isa’s encounter with a group of PTI supporters outside London’s Middle Temple underscores an alarming trend: political protest has increasingly morphed into bullying and harassment. While protest is a democratic right, a clear line exists between peaceful dissent and personal attacks. Justice Isa, who recently retired from his role as Pakistan’s top judge, was attending a prestigious event in London when the incident occurred. Observers have remarked that it was less of a protest than an assault on his dignity – a troubling tactic that reflects a toxic political culture. Let us be clear first: there is no harm in expressing discontent with judicial decisions, political actions, or institutional behaviours. There is also no harm in protest; in fact, the right to peaceful protest is fundamental. That said, the troubling display outside Middle Temple bore little resemblance to the kind of protest that advances a democratic cause. When former judges, political opponents, or perceived detractors of a particular party are routinely subjected to intimidation, one wonders: what is being protested, and why target individuals rather than issues? Unfortunately, this incident mirrors a disturbing trend among PTI supporters, particularly within certain diaspora communities, where opposition is met not with counter-arguments but with coercion and personal attacks.

This pattern is not new. PTI founder Imran Khan has, at various points, encouraged such behaviour, particularly after his ouster through a vote of no-confidence. He once spoke openly of making an ‘example’ of those who defected from his party, even suggesting social repercussions for their families. Such rhetoric has cultivated a culture where harassment of opponents is not only condoned but actively justified. Once again, we must say it is essential to recognise that political disagreement is not only healthy in a democracy but necessary. However, the strategy of harassing, intimidating, and bullying dissenters, both online and offline, is an assault on this principle. Such actions are intended not to enlighten or engage but to suppress, driving a wedge of hostility into the political landscape. This approach has consequences beyond individual targets; it discourages open discourse, erodes trust in public figures, and injects fear into public participation. In the UK and other overseas Pakistani communities, these tactics have isolated non-PTI supporters, sending a chilling message: either align with us, or be prepared to face harassment.

Disturbingly, these aggressive tactics have inspired a wave of similar behaviour among other political factions in Pakistan, and the trend of ‘with us or against us’ has seeped into the broader political arena. No political party is immune from the temptation of coercive tactics. But this is a dangerous road, one that chips away at the very essence of democratic engagement. Without addressing this pattern, Pakistan’s political culture risks descending further into incivility and division, with each side responding in kind. Ending this culture of harassment requires a concerted effort from all political leaders, particularly those in the PTI, to clearly discourage supporters from engaging in intimidation. Real leaders promote discourse over discord, setting a standard for their followers. Silence, or worse, tacit approval, only fans the flames of division and reinforces the idea that opponents are to be fought, not heard. The road back from this toxic culture will have to begin with civility, empathy, and genuine discourse. Only through commitment to these values can Pakistan hope to foster a political environment where disagreement is respected, not punished, and where all voices have the space to be heard without fear.