IN principle, civilians should be tried by a civil judicial system. I feel pain and sympathy for those who have been sen-tenced by military courts recently. It is time the opposition political party reassessed its strategy, and the state reviewed its policies to together restore Quaid-i-Azam’s vision of a modern dem-ocratic welfare state, with Constitution as the supreme law of the land. It is a constitutional right of every citizen to be affiliated with any registered political party and engage in legitimate political activity, including peaceful protests. However, the Constitution does not give right to politicians to lay siege to cities, and limit people’s right to freedom of movement. What happened on May 9, 2023, did not constitute legitimate political activity. The rogue elements that facilitated mass commotion in 2014 and 2017 were responsible for cultivating violent politics. As for the legitimacy of the trials, an episode in England sheds light on the matter. In August 2011, looting and arson occurred in numerous cities following the killing of a black by police. Deployment by police resulted in the death of five people. Within a week, over 3,000 arrests were made, and criminal cases were registered. The government nominated special magistrates to ensure speedy trials, and close to 1,500 arsonists were sentenced. All these sentences were subsequently upheld by the superior judiciary, and in a few cases it even increased the sentence.