One of the critiques that& #39;s leveled at Khadim Rizvi and his group/movement is that they undermine rule of law and the writ of the state.

That much is true, but there& #39;s a broader trend here.

In the classical Islamic era, the ulema were an independent check on rulers as well...

...as the de facto "legislative branch" of government.

Today, that& #39;s no longer the case. The modern nation-state is all-powerful, and has its own internal legislation and checks & balances. Ulema exist outside that.

However, a charismatic cleric like Khadim Rizvi is sometimes able to use the tools & methods of mass politics (rallies, sit-ins, social media, etc) to create power & influence for himself.

This inevitably clashes with the state, even if Rizvi didn& #39;t commit any crime.

In Rizvi& #39;s case, I believe he went too far in condoning people who did actually circumvent rule of law, such as Mumtaz Qadri.

But I& #39;m not blind to the fact that any cleric who gathers independent power will have these accusations thrown at them, something we need to keep in mind