2024 sit-in a missed opportunity to secure Imran’s release, says Rana Sana | The Express Tribune

Prime Minister’s Adviser on Political Affairs Rana Sanaullah claimed on Wednesday that during the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) November 2024 protest, party founder Imran Khan initially agreed to hold talks and not protest at D-Chowk but later withdrew, adding that it was a missed opportunity for his release.

In November 2024, PTI supporters left Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa for Islamabad, demanding the restoration of the party’s electoral mandate, the release of detained party members and the reversal of the 26th Amendment. However, the protest in the federal capital was brought to an end after the government launched a major operation to prevent protesters from reaching D-Chowk, forcing the senior party leadership to “escape” the scene.

In an interview on programme ‘Capital Talk’ on a private news outlet, Sanaullah revealed that the government, including Interior Minister Naqvi, had made an offer to Imran, proposing that the party hold its planned November 2024 sit-in at Sangjani instead of marching towards D-Chowk.

“He (Imran Khan) was being given wise advice, and Mohsin Naqvi was directly engaged in talks with him, telling him not to come towards Islamabad or go to D-Chowk, but to sit in Sangjani and hold talks there. Initially, Imran Khan agreed to this, but after agreeing, he backed out and said that Bushra Bibi would decide. Then she made the decision that they would go to D-Chowk,” Sanaullah said.

He explained that if Imran had agreed, he would have received concessions, adding that the decision led to a missed opportunity for his release.

Asked about whether Imran had allegedly said that he did not want to come out, Sanaullah replied, “You may say so.”

The PM’s aide said that the PTI founder could have secured his release from Adiala jail had the party chosen a more peaceful course of action during their 2024 protest.

Sanaullah noted that the PTI miscalculated the potential outcome of its street agitation, believing it would spark a revolution. “They thought the street movement would bring about a revolution,” he added.

“Imran Khan wants to be released from jail; he does not wish to stay in jail for a single day,” Sanaullah continued. “However, PTI and Imran Khan are misjudging the situation. They were under the illusion that their wheel-jam strike on February 8 would create a significant impact.”

The PM’s aide also alleged that Imran was no longer making decisions for PTI independently. Instead, he claimed that Imran’s wife, Bushra Bibi, was exerting influence on the party’s decisions. “Imran was fully following his wife’s advice when he was prime minister, and he still listens to her today,” Sanaullah said. He dismissed claims that Imran had ever resisted his family’s influence on party decisions.

In reference to the PTI’s announcement earlier today of another street agitation after Eid, he said, “It is understood that Imran’s meeting will be halted during Ramazan following the announcement of launching the street movement.”

He further remarked that PTI leaders lacked the capability to initiate a successful street movement for Imran’s release. He warned that they would be dealt with accordingly if they attempted to create chaos.

Sanaullah said PTI’s proposed movement after Eid was a “conspiracy” against Imran and the party, adding that the PTI founder had been living in good conditions in jail and receiving quality treatment. He also referenced PTI’s February 8 wheel-jam strike call, which he claimed had received a poor response.

The PM’s aide also advised the PTI to engage in talks with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who had invited them for discussions on the country’s stability. “They can receive concessions if they take positive initiatives for the country’s development,” he said, adding that the street protests and sit-ins were only further complicating the situation.

He criticised the PTI for complaining about Imran’s lack of meetings with his family and PTI leaders. “PTI itself was responsible for the situation due to their use of derogatory language following the meeting with Imran,” Sanaullah bit out.

“If these meetings were not used for abuse against the state and state institutions or for below-the-belt propaganda, then who was stopping them from having the meetings?” he asked.