PTI Open to Dialogue but Insists on Institutional Accountability

Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has expressed readiness to engage in talks with stakeholders but demands accountability from state institutions, accusing them of overstepping constitutional boundaries. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur, speaking at a Lahore press conference on July 13, 2025, called for institutions to cease political interference, signaling PTI’s 90-day campaign to reshape Pakistan’s political landscape. This article explores PTI’s stance, its grievances, and the challenges ahead.

Gandapur, joined by PTI Secretary General Barrister Salman Akram Raja and Punjab Assembly Opposition Leader Malik Ahmad Khan Bhachar, criticized state institutions for allegedly orchestrating government formations and toppling regimes, a role he claims violates their constitutional mandate. “Come and talk, acknowledge and correct your mistakes,” Gandapur urged, as reported by Dawn, emphasizing collective responsibility for Pakistan’s future. He argued that institutions tasked with security, like the Pakistan Army, have neglected duties, contributing to rising terrorism in KP and Balochistan while targeting PTI. The party’s call for dialogue hinges on accountability, with Gandapur ready to face punishment if proven guilty of conspiring, but insisting others face the same scrutiny.

PTI’s push follows the detention of its founder, Imran Khan, since mid-2023, which Gandapur described as unprecedented oppression. He accused the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N)-led coalition of exploiting power while public services crumble, a sentiment echoed in PTI’s condemnation of Punjab ministers’ perk hikes amid economic hardship. The party’s strategy shift, relying on grassroots workers rather than political heavyweights, aims to galvanize support for its August 5 protest peak, as noted by The Tribune. However, PTI faces obstacles, including the suspension of 26 Punjab Assembly Members of Provincial Assembly (MPAs) and a Supreme Court ruling denying reserved seats, intensifying its sense of marginalization.

The call for dialogue, tempered by demands for accountability, reflects PTI’s balancing act between confrontation and negotiation. Gandapur’s insistence on engaging “decision-makers” hints at the military’s influence, a sensitive issue in Pakistan’s power dynamics. As PTI’s campaign unfolds, its ability to unify its fractured leadership and mobilize the public will determine whether it can force meaningful change or remain sidelined in a system it claims is rigged against it.