The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) rally in Lahore has left behind numerous controversies. This time, these controversies are not directed at the government or the establishment but are internal to the PTI itself. The Lahore rally has raised several questions that PTI must answer. There is also ambiguity regarding whether the rally was successful or not and if PTI achieved any political success from it. The answers to all these questions revolve around the rally’s success or failure.
A clear difference in government strategy was observed between the rallies in Islamabad and Lahore. In Islamabad, the administration had set up containers and blocked various roads, leaving only one route open to the rally site, resulting in considerable noise from the containers. In contrast, there were no containers in Lahore, and all roads leading to the city were open. This facilitated a free flow of traffic, allowing PTI to gather supporters easily.
People first talk about numbers; indeed, public attendance is a measure of any rally’s success or failure. If people are present, the rally is deemed successful; if not, it is considered a failure. There is much ambiguity regarding the success of this rally in this context. How many people constitute success? PTI’s rally can be evaluated in comparison to its past rallies.
The attendance at this rally can be compared to past gatherings in Lahore. Therefore, to determine whether attendance was lower or higher, one must consider previous rallies.
In my opinion, this rally was smaller compared to PTI’s previous gatherings. If compared to earlier rallies, attendance was indeed lower. Whether at Minar-e-Pakistan or the hockey stadium, the number of people was fewer than in past events.
One aspect that is puzzling is why the leadership of PTI, specifically Asad Qaiser and Umar Ayub, did not participate in the rally. Barrister Gohar attended but delivered a brief speech. However, the absence of others raises questions about what is happening behind the scenes. Sure, Sher Afzal Marwat was unable to attend due to illness, but did everyone else fall ill too?
In Islamabad, the leadership’s presence was robust, whereas, in Lahore, PTI leadership seemed disengaged, prompting many questions. For instance, Khalid Khurshid, the former Chief Minister of Gilgit, was vocal in Islamabad but absent in Lahore. The reason for many leaders’ absence in Lahore needs to be explored; were they deterred by the arrests that occurred in Islamabad?
Compared to the Islamabad rally, speeches in Lahore were noticeably weaker. The establishment was not criticized as it was in Islamabad, perhaps due to the reactions from the establishment that compelled PTI to alter its approach. The political atmosphere created at the Islamabad rally was not maintained in Lahore, and the reasons for this need to be investigated. Did PTI realize it made a mistake or did it become fearful?
Consider the punctuality of Ali Amin Gandapur. Barrister Gohar is the chairman of PTI and should ideally have spoken last. Why did he choose to speak at 5:45 PM? Did he anticipate that the rally would conclude at 6 PM? In my 30 years of covering rallies, the event typically ends after the final speech. People leave after the last address. If Gandapur was expected to speak, Gohar should have waited.
PTI now claims thousands attended the rally, asserting a figure of 50,000, while government sources estimate no more than 10,000. I do not believe either figure, but everyone agrees that there were people present. If thousands were indeed present, could a few police officers shut down the sound system? Could the power have been turned off?
Could generators have been shut down? I believe that without the consent of the rally’s administration, neither the power nor the sound system could have been turned off. How could a few police officers climb on stage, declare that time was up, and everyone complied, ending the rally? Such actions do not occur in protest movements or political rallies. Did the FIR registered after the Islamabad rally instill such fear in PTI that they ended the Lahore rally at the government’s designated time? It concluded at 6 PM as if following a military schedule.
Was it predetermined that Gandapur would not arrive on time and the rally would conclude before he arrived? Why did PTI leadership not wait for Gandapur and his accompanying group? Even if the power was turned off, they could have waited for him. When the leadership left, the crowd dispersed. When Gandapur, along with his colleagues from KP, arrived, the venue was deserted, with neither PTI leadership nor attendees present.
If thousands were indeed present at the rally, the police would not have had the audacity to cut off the power and sound. Such actions could only occur with PTI’s consent. Therefore, Gandapur’s inability to speak and his return in failure suggests that PTI was complicit in this situation. Otherwise, it would have been impossible. He could have delivered a speech even in the dark. One thing he did not mention is whether they wanted no speech to occur. Speaking after returning to Peshawar lacks the significance of addressing the audience in Lahore.
Consequently, Gandapur’s inability to speak in Lahore can be seen as a victory for Maryam Nawaz. She prevented Gandapur from delivering his address in Lahore. This could be regarded as a political victory for Maryam Nawaz and a political defeat for Gandapur.