ISLAMABAD: The PTI on Thursday accused intelligence agencies of interfering in the parliamentarians’ affairs, but expressed the confidence that no one could break and ban the opposition party.
Recalling that the Supreme Court had declared PTI a political party, the opposition leadership cautioned the powers that be against considering invoking Article 6 against Imran Khan and banning the PTI.
Talking to journalists outside Adiala Jail after meeting Imran Khan, Leader of Opposition in the National Assembly Omar Ayub Khan said the former prime minister had made it clear that PTI would continue its struggle for haqeeqi azadi (real freedom).
He asked the government to focus on public-related issues, such as high inflation, rather than trying to curb the PTI.
Claims spy agency interfering in parliamentarians’ affairs; seeks action against CEC under Article 6
Mr Ayub alleged that the caretaker government had made money from wheat import and the current ruling elite had been eying on making gains from privatisation.
He accused the Special Investment Facilitation Council of planning to generate Rs30 billion by privatising the national assets worth over Rs1,000bn.
He alleged that intelligence officials had been interfering during the party leaders’ meeting with Imran Khan and asked them to focus on counterterrorism efforts.
He threatened that the Islamabad and Punjab police, interior secretary and superintendent of Adiala Jail may be summoned to the privilege committee of parliament.
In reply to a question, he said Article 6 should be invoked against the chief election commissioner instead of Imran Khan.
PTI’s Central Information Secretary Raoof Hasan warned that any adverse action against the party would cause damage to the country.
He said PTI would hold a public meeting in the federal capital.
Legal team’s presser
The legal team of PTI at a press conference urged retired judges to turn down offers of becoming ad hoc judges of the Supreme Court.
They said that if it was necessary to appoint ad hoc judges, such a decision should be taken by the incoming chief justice and not the outgoing CJP.
Advocate Shoaib Shaheen claimed that it was illegal to recruit ad hoc judges as appointments can only be made in the absence/unavailability of permanent judges.
Referring to reports that the SC decision regarding reserved seats would not be implemented, he wondered if such a step would not be considered as contempt of court.
Advocate Ishtiaq A. Khan demanded that the upcoming meeting of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan be postponed.
PTI-SIC meeting
The PTI and Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) rejected the government’s plan to ban PTI and initiate proceedings against Imran Khan under Article 6.
They demanded Article 6 should be invoked against those who had been flouting the Constitution and breaking laws for the past two years.
During a joint meeting of their respective parliamentary parties, the PTI and SIC condemned the “ill-treatment” of PTI Vice Chairman Shah Mehmood Qureshi while he was being shifted to Lahore.
The participants rejected the appointment of ad hoc judges and alleged that the move was aimed at destroying the real structure of the SC in order to create an artificial numerical superiority of an individual.
They stated that the detention of PTI MNAs Moazzam Jatoi and Sahibzada Amir Sultan was a violation of parliamentary traditions, as lawmakers could not be arrested without the permission of the National Assembly speaker.
Later, Mr Ayub moved a privilege motion in the National Assembly claiming that on July 4 he, along with Shibli Faraz, Junaid Akbar and other parliamentarians went to Adiala Jail, but an ASI asked them to leave.
He alleged that the privilege of parliamentarian was breached on the directions of the ISI sector commander of Rawalpindi/Islamabad.
Published in Dawn, July 19th, 2024
Source link
