Post-SC ruling: Replacing chief minister, governor’s rule under discussion for Balochistan

Issue brought up in at least two meetings held this week.


Qaiser Butt October 26, 2012

ISLAMABAD:


Various political and administrative options are being discussed in the wake of a damning Supreme Court judgment that held that the Balochistan government had failed in its fundamental responsibility of protecting the basic rights of the people.


While it has already been reported that the provincial government had decided, in principle, to challenge the court’s judgment, other, more drastic steps are also under consideration.

A highly placed source requesting anonymity told The Express Tribune that an in-house change to replace the Chief Minister Nawab Aslam Raisani with another Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) leader in the province is one of the options being discussed. The second option is to place the province under governor’s rule.

Sadiq Umrani, a provincial minister and the president of the Balochistan chapter of the PPP, has confirmed that these options are being discussed to save the provincial government from a potential constitutional crisis. He, along with other party leaders in Islamabad, has examined the implications of the Supreme Court ruling and said that “an in-house change in Balochistan is the only solution to address the law and order situation.”

Umrani also discussed this issue with President Asif Ali Zardari in a meeting in Islamabad on Wednesday. According to him, the restoration of law and order in Balochistan has always been a top priority for President Zardari and he has advocated dialogue with all political forces in the province.

Meanwhile, another meeting took place in Quetta on Wednesday, chaired by the provincial governor. Political observers are considering it “highly significant” with regard to the fate of Chief Minister Raisani.

Former deputy chairman of Senate Jan Jamali said that it was a unique meeting in which the corps commander, inspector-general Frontier Constabulary, provincial chief minister, chief secretary, home secretary, inspector-general police and intelligence officials came together to discuss the situation in the province.

“Constitutionally speaking, the provincial government has already lost its right of existence,” Jamali said, adding that, for all intents and purposes, there has been no government in Balochistan for the past two years.

Jamali demanded the imposition of governor’s rule in Balochistan for at least three months, with the possibility of an extension for another six months.

“The damage caused to the province and the whole country during Nawab Raisani’s government is beyond imagination … the present government had nothing to its credit except a high grade of inefficiency, unprecedented financial corruption, a pathetic law and order situation and an abysmal administrative set-up in the province,’ he said, while welcoming the Supreme Court ruling.

However, he also said that the Supreme Court took too long to make this decision: “Now it is too late [and] the law and order machinery had totally collapsed. Target killing on political and ethnic grounds [has] reached its highest level where no one, whomsoever, is safe.”

Former federal minister and ex-diplomat Amanullah Gichki said that it was a positive omen that the top army officers joined the provincial chief minister for a meeting under the provincial governor. According to him, the people of Balochistan have welcomed the meeting as they have long been demanding that stakeholders join hands in order to address widespread political and administrative problems.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 27th, 2012.

COMMENTS (1)

usman786 | 11 years ago | Reply

Will it ba change as all MPs are in tthe govt as ministers so they own the resp for last 5 years. Hold new general elections and include other tribes on the condition they will do development work in their area. Remove sardars who donot agree and fill their kitty with oil money

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ