Islamabad’s administrators appear to have discovered a remarkable formula for urban improvement: remove the tables where people gather, uproot the greenery that makes the city bearable, and pour yet more concrete into underpasses and wider roads. The result may be faster movement at selected junctions. Whether it produces a better city is an entirely different question. The ongoing enforcement campaign against outdoor restaurant seating, including reported removals at Kohsar Market and at Quetta Chai in F-6 Markaz, is more than a dispute over chairs on pavements. It exposes a deeper failure to understand how cities create livelihoods, social life and economic value. The specific circumstances and permissions of individual establishments require verification; that is precisely why a transparent, case-by-case approach is essential.

Outdoor cafés are not an urban defect. They are part of the urban economy. They turn commercial centres into places where people want to linger, meet friends, conduct informal business and spend money. They create jobs for waiters, cooks, cleaners, guards, suppliers and delivery workers. In a country starved of employment, reducing a restaurant’s capacity by removing its outdoor tables is not a cosmetic intervention. It can undermine the economics of the business and the livelihoods attached to it. The employment impact has not been publicly quantified. No responsible commentator should invent a figure. But the mechanism is obvious: lower seating capacity can mean lower sales while rent, utilities and other fixed costs continue. Marginal enterprises suffer first. Quetta-style tea cafés are particularly important because they provide affordable gathering places, not merely premium dining for the affluent. They also offer a route into entrepreneurship for operators who cannot afford large indoor premises.

There is a genuine public interest in keeping footpaths accessible, protecting emergency routes and preventing private occupation of green belts. Nobody has a right to obstruct pedestrians merely by calling the obstruction a café. But it does not follow that all outdoor seating should be treated as an encroachment. Mark the pedestrian corridor, define the seating footprint, regulate hours and noise, charge a transparent licence fee and enforce the conditions. That is municipal governance. Confiscating furniture without a coherent citywide framework is not. The contradiction becomes particularly damaging when traders claim to have received permissions or paid fees before their installations were removed. Temporary........

© The Friday Times