Imran Khan’s controversial remarks about the PSL were rooted in the fear that the prime minister was using the popular sentiment for personal gain

There’s no dearth of colourful banter in Pakistani politics.  Ideally though, a short leash should never compromise dignity and decency - more so when the indulging lot are elected parliamentarians.
Unfortunately, that sliver of expectation the constituents have of their representatives was tossed away last week right in front of the parliament - talk about symbolism - when Murad Saeed, the firebrand parliamentarian of the opposition Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf (PTI) attempted to assault Mian Javed Latif, an MP from the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) after the latter provoked him by calling Imran Khan, the PTI chairman a “traitor”.
Saeed, a Pathan, became the youngest parliamentarian at 27 following the 2013 general elections. Hailing from Swat in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, he is regarded as a promising politician for his grounded politics, deep sense of loyalty, sober conduct and a proclivity to debate with fact and reason.
Mian Javed Latif, on the other hand, is a veteran politician from Sheikhupura in the Punjab province. He is also usually polite, and a regular presence on the talk show circuit, defending the government of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif with solid assurance.
However, in conduct unbecoming of elected representatives, the two were locked in an abusive physical exchange following the “traitor” insult; ostensibly, Latif had ruffled Saeed over Khan’s remarks about the recently held Pakistan Super League final in Lahore and his dim view of the participating foreign players.
But even as this fracas was caught on cameras, what really brought the house down was the ruling party member’s shocking personal slander while addressing the media afterwards. Latif was forced to apologise the next day as a media storm threatened to waylay him. The PML-N veteran admitted that his reference to Saeed’s family was “indecent”.
But the PTI is having none of it with Imran Khan announcing that henceforth no member of his party would be in attendance where Latif is an invitee. This episode is not only symptomatic of a general intolerance in polity and male chauvinism, but also reflects the intense rivalry between PML-N and PTI that increasingly appears to cross a line.
While the mercury is rising over the eventual fate of the Panama case where PTI, as the main petitioner, is banking on a Supreme Court verdict against Sharif following a five-month hearing into allegations that purport his children to have bought luxury properties abroad from ill-gotten offshore wealth, more recently it also has had to do with circumstances surrounding the PSL final in Lahore.
The PTI chairman first appeared to back the idea (of PSL final in Lahore), but then changed tack and dismissed it as “madness” while raising a red rag over security. He even predicted that in the event of an untoward incident, Pakistan could forget about the possibility of international cricket returning home for another decade.
With no love lost for Najam Sethi, the mover-and-shaker of PSL that has come to assume a larger-than-life entity for starved fans back home, Khan - whose word on cricket is reverently regarded across Pakistan given his legendary status in the sport as a former World Cup-winning captain - appeared to politicise the issue.
In the ensuing war of words, Sethi accused Khan of hurting the interests of Pakistan cricket with his “irresponsible” comments and which, he alleged, had influenced the decision of a number of international stars to abandon the final in Lahore. He named Kevin Pietersen as one, and claimed the stalwart had pointed to Khan’s statement for his decision to pull out when Sethi tried to convince him otherwise.
Days later, Pietersen denied in a video release that Khan or his statement had anything to do with the decision!
But all hell broke loose last week when the PTI chairman was heard in an off-the-record interaction with some journalists disparaging the quality of foreign cricketers who played in Lahore.  In the leaked video, he called the players “phatichar” (useless) and even suggested some of them may have been brought “from Africa”. The other term he used in the short clip was “railoo kata” - a player, who is deemed not good enough to hold his own, but is selected anyway to play for both sides to fill in the numbers.
As was expected, the remarks coming from the “Lion of Lahore” - as Khan was fondly dubbed in his long distinguished cricket career - offended the fans deeply, leaving even his own supporters in a tizzy because PSL is considered by millions of Pakistanis as a “national asset” above party lines. The fans were already dismayed by Khan’s decision to give the show at Gaddafi Stadium where he has the most prestigious stand famously named after him, a skip. Ironically, Peshawar Zalmi, the team from Khan’s province, won the trophy!
Ever since, the PTI chief has struggled to explain his remarks though there has been a swift damage-control swing to offset the outrage with the announcement of a PKR20mn ($190,000) reward at a high profile celebration at the Chief Minister’s House in Peshawar. However, at the time of writing this, the Zalmi team had reportedly declined the invite.
Having said that, media reports last week said the political colour to the final in Lahore was not without foundation as the PTI chief feared the Sharif government was using the occasion to demonstrate public support by buying the whole lot of the PSL final tickets for its party activists and supporters. Quoting unnamed sources, daily The Express Tribune said Khan felt the move was aimed at pressurising the Supreme Court which is to give its verdict on the Panama papers shortly.
However, the problem with this “conspiracy theory” is that large sections of the jam-packed stadium on the day of the Lahore final were actually raising vociferous anti-Sharif slogans! While the PTI chief was hard-pressed to explain this, it sure has contributed to a deepening divide between the two parties with no signs of a thaw in the distance.

*The writer is Community Editor