His duplicity makes him unfit for the system
Numerous stands taken by Imran Khan and statements issued by him create doubts about his democratic credentials. It pains one to note that a man leading the third largest party in the National Assembly should have so little understanding of a democratic polity.
In his latest tirade against ‘fake democracy’ and ‘fake dictatorship’ he maintains that “had the dictators been fair, Pakistan would have moved forward.” This recalls to mind a dark side of Khan’s politics which one had hoped the PTI leader had left behind. As Pervez Musharraf assumed power, Imran Khan developed a soft corner for the military ruler. While Khan has rejected the 2013 elections for being rigged, he raised no objection against the 2002 fraudulent elections. He did not raise his voice against the blatant political engineering conducted after the elections by Muharraf with the help of the ISI and National Accountability Bureau. So close was Khan’s relationship with the military ruler that he was invited to become the Prime Minister, as he himself claims.
Imran Khan’s lament that ‘had the dictators been fair, Pakistan would have moved forward’ again indicates the PTI chief’s fascination with dictatorship. The dictatorial streak in Imran Khan makes him intolerant of all those who tend to differ with him. He can lavish praises on a judge when he is seen to be supporting him and trash him when he does not. While politicians strengthen institutions, the PTI chief has consistently tried to demolish the courts, Election Commission and Parliament.
The attitude makes Imran a misfit in democracy. Among other problems he is thoroughly inconsistent. He has resigned from the NA along with his party members calling it an illegitimate production of rigging. He insists however on taking part in the Senate elections. Half the members of the Senate will be chosen by the four provincial assemblies, three of which the PTI has already rejected as fake. How come it is kosher to sit in the Senate but not in the NA?