Reclaiming the Right to Protest

The recent scenes of police brutality witnessed in Karachi are deeply troubling, serving as a stark reminder of how far the state is willing to go to stifle dissent. This past Sunday, police officers cracked down violently on a peaceful protest led by civil society, using disproportionate and unjustifiable force. The imagery from that day – women dragged across streets, men beaten with batons, journalists strangled, and clothes torn as protesters were detained – drew widespread condemnation across the country. The ruling party in Sindh, however, offered only a token response on social media, failing to take any concrete action to address the outrage their officers had caused.
The troubling fact is that such incidents of police brutality are not isolated. Just days ago, similar scenes unfolded in Lahore, where students protesting an alleged rape were met with brute force. In both cases, the authorities’ response raises serious questions about their respect for citizens’ fundamental rights, particularly the right to peacefully assemble. In Karachi, where two rival protests had been scheduled, the authorities chose to enforce Section 144, a measure intended for serious public safety concerns. This routine use of Section 144 not only curtails citizens’ political rights but also reflects a lack of imagination and will to find solutions that do not resort to heavy-handed repression.
Pakistan is hardly the only country where protests and counter-protests occur simultaneously. Around the world, it is common practice for law enforcement agencies to manage such gatherings by keeping rival groups apart and ensuring the safety of all participants. Instead of managing the situation through careful planning and a commitment to non-violent crowd control, the Karachi police indiscriminately targeted peaceful protesters and created chaos. By treating all protesters as potential threats, they only added fuel to the fire, sparking even greater anger and frustration within the community. In a time when trust in state institutions is already fragile, this kind of aggression does more harm than good.
What’s more disturbing is that, rather than implementing crowd-control measures that would allow for the peaceful expression of grievances, the police escalated tensions. The aftermath is now visible: further protests and heightened agitation against the state. The consequences of such aggression will only lead to further discontent, forcing citizens to question whether their rights matter at all to those in power.
If the police and government officials do not take swift, meaningful steps to hold the perpetrators accountable, we risk witnessing even greater unrest. It is essential that law enforcement prioritizes de-escalation and respects constitutional rights. Policymakers and police leaders must ensure that the right to protest remains intact. It is time for those in power to reflect on their responsibilities and recognize that violence only deepens the rift between the state and its citizens. Peaceful demonstrations are a sign of a healthy democracy, and if we are to preserve this essential aspect of our society, the government must respond with dialogue, not brute force