It is difficult to fathom what drove ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif to make the irresponsible statement he made in a newspaper interview, embarrassing his party and providing the country’s enemies with fuel to denigrate it. Referring to the Mumbai terrorist attack he said, “Militant organisations are active. Call them non-state actors, should we allow them to cross the border and killed 150 people in Mumbai? Explain it to me. Why can’t we complete the trial? This is unacceptable. This is exactly what we are struggling for.” In other words, the terrorists who caused mayhem in the Indian city were not independent operators but had institutional collusion, and that the activity has not stopped.

That appalling carnage, believed to be the handiwork of Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad, was widely condemned in this country. India had accused Pakistan’s security agencies of involvement, but disallowed its investigators to interview the lone survivor of that attack as well as some local suspects, which is the main cause of non-progress in the case proceedings. The three-time prime minister having lent veracity to Indian claims the media in that country has had a field day saying ‘we told you so.’ At home, his statement has sparked a raging controversy creating differences in the ruling party, and raising some serious questions about his own ability to deal with sensitive issues. While the National Security Committee met on Monday - at the military authorities request - to grapple with the fallout, PML-N President and Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif, at a loss to defend his older brother’s statement, distanced himself from it, saying the news report had “incorrectly attributed certain remarks to PML-N Quaid Nawaz Sharif, which do not represent PML-N’s party position.” The newspaper, though, stands by its story as it has not issued any clarification. Nor has Nawaz Sharif denied having made the assertions attributed to him.

Apparently panicked by his legal troubles in the Panama Papers corruption case, he has lost self-control. Three times he took oath of the prime minister office. That bound him to discharge his duties to the best of his abilities, and not to make public any sensitive information to which he may become privy as the holder of the nation’s top office. From which it follows, if he had incriminating evidence against the military agencies for involvement in the Mumbai attacks, he should have taken action against them when he was in a position to do so. He himself becomes complicit in the misdeed he is blaming on others by failing to perform his duties to the best of his abilities. His supporter, of course, will argue he lacked real power. In that case, too, he should have shown courage of convictions and called a spade a spade when he had the right opportunity rather than to wait all these years to say what he has publicly said now. He seems to have been moved simply by his personal grievances. A few days ago, he had promised to reveal some secrets “buried in my chest” despite having sworn to keep them there. Assuming this is the secret he had threatened to unburden, he has done a great disservice to his party and, even more, to the country.