Since the time Imran Khan led PTI to power in a sweeping general-election triumph, the opposition lawmakers have worked in ways that can be considered to go against ethics. Throughout our parliamentary history, opposition and treasury members have always been up in arms against each other in the National Assembly over the handling of different issues. This time around it were protests against Aasia Bibi’s acquittal, with the opposition criticizing the government for entering into a deal with those protesting against the Supreme Court order and the government terming it the best document to bring the country out of an imbroglio. The wave of disgust worsened so much that Speaker Asad Qaiser ordered the sergeant-at-arms to physically expel Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) lawmaker Syed Rafiullah and Abdul Majeed Khan of the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) from the house and abruptly adjourned the sitting in order to avoid a possible scuffle between the two legislators. Things turned uglier when some members kicked up brouhaha to protest against PPP lawmaker Shazia Marri’s remarks that the agreement between the government and the protesters was a surrender document and likened it to the 1971 surrender by Gen Niazi leading to the separation of East Pakistan. The opposition often calls the PTI chief by his full name Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi. Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs Ali Mohammad Khan, who was immediately given the floor by the speaker to respond, objected to Ms Marri’s remarks and asked her to desist from ridiculing the whole Niazi tribe for an individual’s act. The minister said it was true that Gen Niazi had surrendered before the Indian troops but there were other Niazis in the country who were rendering great services and sacrifices for the nation. The Speaker gave a ruling stating that no lawmaker would be allowed to ridicule any tribe or clan in future. Such scenes have been witnessed between other lawmakers as well terming each other as Bhaand and Moulajut. Why opposition leaders start maligning the treasury members, at whim, to serve their self-interest, or to perpetuate their rivalry with the government? The present government has functional and effective state machinery to execute their economic, social programs, and provide public services to the citizens. It possesses meritocracy, is nepotism-free and believes in non-patronage, is staffed by nice guys, the relationship between the government and individual citizen is an agreeable one, it provides standard, consistent service to all citizens, giving no preferential treatment to wealthy and powerful elites, it controls its own HR, it recruits, promotes, transfers, terminates, without politicians’ interference, and gives adequate autonomy in implementation, execution of policies, while political leaders focus on policy-making. The lawmakers must behave sensibly for the love of the country.