Out of a total of 81 PML-Q members in the Punjab Assembly, 47 submitted an application to the speaker on February 3 in which they requested that they be allotted separate seats in the house and be allowed to appoint Dr Tahir Ali Javed as their parliamentary leader. Though the speaker accepted their first request on February 15, their second demand has been referred to the Law Department.
The show cause notice issued on Wednesday reminded the recipients that they had been awarded the Pakistan Muslim League-Q ticket by the president of the party, Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi, at their requests. It says that the Unification Bloc members violated Elahi’s trust by opting to sit on the treasury benches under the garb of the Unification Bloc, which is not even registered with the Election Commission of Pakistan.
The notice gives the ‘defectors’ three days to submit their replies to Chaudhry Zaheer. In case they fail to do so, the opposition leader would assume that they have accepted the charges levelled against them. He would then send disqualification references against them to the chief election commissioner (CEC) through the presiding officer (speaker), who was constitutionally bound to forward these references to the CEC within two days of receiving the references.
Chaudhry Zaheeruddin, told The Express Tribune, that “as the opposition leader and the PML-Q parliamentary leader” he had served show cause notices on 15 dissidents. “These members were elected on tickets with bicycle as their election symbol in 2008. But they collaborated with the party in power to form an unconstitutional and illegal ‘Lota Bloc’ (a bloc of turn coats),” he said.
The show cause notice also points out another violation of party discipline; meetings between the defecting members and the chief minister, in disregard of party’s decision, for inclusion in the provincial cabinet. The notice mentions ‘on record’ statements of the members as evidence of the violations. The notice also cites various public announcements in which the notified MPAs had openly declared that they would give the chief minister their vote of confidence. The 15 party renegades have been asked to explain how they could request the speaker to nominate a parliamentary leader and the opposition leader from amongst them when, according to the law, the sole authority in this regard is the president of the party. Unification Bloc leader Dr Tahir Ali Javed told The Express Tribune that the show cause notices “only show PML-Q’s confusion”. Calling the notice “premature”, he said, “A show cause notice can be issued following a specific violation like a vote of confidence, election for speaker or vote on a money bill. The Unification Bloc has not violated any rules so far,” maintained Javed. He added that he enjoyed the support of the majority of PML-Q members. “Chaudhry Zaheeruddin should have consulted me before issuing the notice”. Warning Zaheer of a retaliatory show cause notice, he said that on moral grounds alone Zaheeruddin should accept him as the parliamentary leader.
Javed, without mincing any words, refused to reply to Chaudhry Zaheer’s notice. Javed said that he was confident that the rest of PML-Q members would eventually join Unification Bloc, “Zaheer will have to abandon his current position”. “We have the majority now. It is our democratic right to have a parliamentary leader in the House,” the Unification Bloc leader said.
When asked whether the speaker would send the references moved by Zaheer to the CEC, Javed said that the decision was the speaker’s to make.
MPA Saba Sadiq, a PML-Q member, who abstained from voting on the money bill. Zaheeruddin had first served her with a show cause notice then filed a declaration against her with the speaker. Though the Lahore High Court, in 2009, had told the speaker to forward the reference to the CEC, after the speaker did not forward it for months, the speaker is yet to comply with court orders.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 24th, 2011.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ