No decision on support for PTI’s 'Islamabad siege', says Lal Masjid cleric

Maulana Abdul Aziz says he agrees with Imran Khan's views but doesn’t support his actions


Arsalan Altaf October 26, 2016
Maulana Abdul Aziz. PHOTO: FILE

ISLAMABAD: Amid reports that Lal Masjid planned to join Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf's (PTI) November 2 'Islamabad siege', the mosque's cleric Maulana Abdul Aziz has clarified he has not taken any such decision.

Shuhada Foundation, which handles all of Aziz’s interactions with media, had said on Monday it could extend support to PTI for the lockdown.

The Foundation comprises relatives of those killed during clashes with the security forces in 2007. Its prime objective is to fight a legal battle for those affected due to the operation.

Lal Masjid hints at support for PTI's Islamabad lockdown

Aziz, in a statement on Wednesday, said he supported Imran Khan’s point of view but did not approve of the way PTI has adopted to achieve its objective. “I support Imran Khan’s view that there is extreme corruption, lawlessness and oppression in the country. But the method Imran is adopting i.e. the government is sent home and ‘they’ come... this won’t solve the problem,” Aziz said.

The cleric said the PTI chief’s diagnosis of the issue was correct but the solution lied in imposition of Islamic law.

Imran accuses Punjab CM of receiving kickbacks on development projects

The Foundation’s announcement was followed by Difa-e-Pakistan Council – an alliance of various religious and political groups such as Jamaatud Dawa and Ahle Sunnat wal Jamaat – to meet in Islamabad to discuss their support for PTI’s plan to seal Islamabad.

Difa-e-Pakistan is led by Maulana Samiul Haq, chief of JUI-S and the main ‘madrasah’ Haqqania in Akora Khattak. The PTI-led Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government allocated Rs300 million for the religious seminary in the 2016-17 annual budget — a move that sparked widespread criticism.

COMMENTS

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