London Crimes and Pakistani

I have written before that the law on dual citizenship in Pakistan should be abolished, and now the time has come to end it. Anyone who has obtained the citizenship of another country should be barred from voting or participating in Pakistani politics, and their right to purchase property in Pakistan should also be conditional. Any person who has sworn allegiance to another country should have their Pakistani citizenship revoked.

The involvement of overseas Pakistanis is a significant reason behind the disorder in Pakistan’s political, administrative, and social structures. They neither understand the fundamentals of Pakistani politics nor are they subject to its laws, yet they have positioned themselves as prominent players in Pakistan’s political sphere. This has not only disrupted the political climate but has also brought considerable harm to the country.

I still remember that, before the elections, when Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) Asad Qaiser was advocating for reducing tensions with institutions, it was the overseas Pakistanis who sabotaged and damaged this effort. Notably, a majority of the overseas dual citizens who are PTI supporters have contributed to an adverse impact on the political climate in Pakistan. Despite living in developed countries and holding passports from democratic and civilized nations, their behavior in Pakistani politics is worse than that of the most uncultured individuals, giving Pakistani politics a negative image while tarnishing Pakistan’s reputation and culture.

These rude and uncivilized overseas Pakistanis are responsible for PTI’s current challenges. From abroad, they have essentially taken PTI hostage, not allowing it to adapt to Pakistan’s political climate, which constantly creates issues for PTI.

PTI has to pay a high price in Pakistan for their reckless actions abroad. Every time PTI has to answer for their actions in Pakistan, it becomes evident how deeply PTI leadership is affected. Yet, PTI remains so entangled with them that breaking free seems impossible.

For example, recently, when Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) president Nawaz Sharif visited London for a day, PTI supporters in London protested outside his home, creating an outrageous scene. Tell me, did this protest benefit or harm PTI’s political stance? Is PTI staging similar protests outside Nawaz Sharif’s home in Pakistan? In Pakistan, PTI demands the sanctity of private boundaries, yet in London, they attack the homes of political opponents. When the response comes in Pakistan, they complain loudly. But how can one behave so disrespectfully in London without expecting repercussions in Pakistan?

On the other hand, in Pakistan, we see that the faction of lawyers supporting Qazi Faez Isa has won the Supreme Court Bar elections, defeating representatives of Hamid Khan and Salman Akram Raja, who opposed Qazi. This can be viewed as evidence that a majority of lawyers support Qazi Isa, his decisions, and the 26th constitutional amendment. While the majority of Pakistani lawyers accept Qazi’s decisions, PTI supporters are seen chasing Qazi’s car in London, which only reflects disrespect and ignorance. They attempt to tarnish Pakistan’s honor while Qazi’s recent selection as a visiting professor at a London university is actually an honor for Pakistan.

Such rudeness on London’s streets does not sit well with Pakistanis and has its own repercussions, which PTI has to endure. A similar issue exists with pro-PTI YouTubers. Recently, PTI’s leadership itself has begun speaking out against these YouTubers. Salman Akram Raja has stated that PTI will not formulate policies under their pressure.

These YouTubers stir bitterness merely for likes and views, leaving PTI to suffer the consequences in Pakistan. They have no stakes in Pakistan’s politics, yet they have assumed the role of PTI’s policymakers. We are witnessing, for the first time, YouTubers dictating a political party’s policy. They pursue policies that serve their financial interests, with no connection to reality.

In fact, news has emerged that PTI’s Secretary General Salman Akram Raja recently held a crucial meeting without inviting overseas PTI leaders. Significant decisions were made without them, as they cannot be a part of major decision-making processes. Sitting abroad, they make unrealistic demands like overthrowing the government, storming Adiala Jail, or defaming institutions—tasks which PTI’s Pakistan-based leadership knows are not only impossible but would also incur a high cost that they are no longer willing to bear.

So, in my view, when PTI must pay the price in Pakistan for the actions of overseas Pakistanis, their complaints are understandable. We must remember where the political atmosphere deteriorates. An attack on a home, whether in London or Pakistan, is fundamentally the same. If PTI has the power to behave disgracefully in London or New York, then other political parties possess the power to respond in Pakistan, which they do, as a reaction.

If you behave disgracefully in London and the US, the response will come in Islamabad and Lahore. This is why I oppose the intervention and involvement of overseas Pakistanis in Pakistani politics. They should focus on the politics of the countries they live in, which would be more beneficial for Pakistan. Let them try to become the prime minister of Britain or a senator in the US. Street-level abuse benefits neither Pakistan nor PTI.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *