ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and Tehreek-e-Tahaffuz-e-Aain-e-Pakistan (TTAP) on Sunday vowed to fight the imposition of an emergency and Governor’s Rule in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa on legal, parliamentary and public fronts.
They accused the federal government of exploiting terrorism as a pretext to send packing what they called the only democratically elected government in the country, while dismissing other governments as products of the “Form 47-installed regime”, despite the KP government enjoying a two-thirds majority.
In a statement following consultations, PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan, TTAP Vice Chairman Allama Raja Nasir Abbas, PTI Secretary General Salman Raja and other leaders rejected the measures, questioning whether they were genuinely required by security concerns or intended to weaken a provincial administration led by a political rival.
READ MORE: Emergency, governor’s rule imposed in KP as president approves cabinet decision
The leaders maintained that counterterrorism efforts should not undermine provincial autonomy or override an electoral mandate.
Barrister Gohar questioned the timing of the security-related allegations, claiming the provincial government had cooperated with federal authorities and participated in consultations before terrorism became central to the justification for intervention.
He said the PTI had attended 15 meetings and two days of negotiations, adding that a written record was available.
He challenged the federal government to clarify whether terrorism had been cited during negotiations before October 2 and, if not, why it had subsequently become a principal justification for action against the provincial government.
According to Gohar, federal representatives had initially accused the KP government of failing to cooperate on counterterrorism.
He said he disputed the allegation, maintaining that the provincial administration had attended relevant apex committee meetings, strengthened police capacity and increased security resources.
He also challenged federal authorities to identify any instance in which the provincial government had refused requested security funding.
The competing claims could be assessed through meeting minutes, funding records, official correspondence and other evidence.
Gohar further alleged that terrorism was being invoked to obstruct the PTI’s planned long march.
He questioned the rationale for imposing an emergency and Governor’s Rule across the province when, according to him, the security concerns cited by the authorities were concentrated in 12 districts.
The PTI chairman also condemned the reported detention of Chief Minister Sohail Afridi as an attack on the provincial mandate, saying the party had been unable to contact him directly.
In a separate statement, Gohar thanked Jamat-e-Islami, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazal (JUI-F) and the Awami National Party (ANP) for opposing Governor’s Rule and emergency, describing their positions as evidence of broader political resistance to the intervention.
Invoking the 18th Amendment, Gohar argued that allegations of poor governance could not, on their own, justify federal intervention overriding provincial autonomy.
He maintained that the imposition of an emergency and Governor’s Rule violated the spirit of provincial autonomy and said the measures could be challenged in court.
He alleged that federal interference had eroded provincial authority and represented a further concentration of power at the centre.
He said the PTI would pursue legal remedies, raise the issue in elected forums and mobilise public support against the decision.
The party also linked the dispute to its longstanding demands concerning former prime minister Imran Khan, including access to medical treatment, meetings with him and contact with his children.
Gohar questioned delays in cases involving PTI leaders and Imran Khan’s wife, Bushra Bibi, arguing that prolonged proceedings had deprived them of timely judicial consideration.
Reiterating the party’s opposition to terrorism, Gohar said the PTI supported the country security efforts but would resist attempts to use security concerns to suppress political demands or peaceful mobilisation.
He described the planned march as a campaign for justice rather than a demonstration for its own sake.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2026
Comments