Bilawal flays govt for not developing reforms on re-establishment of military courts

PPP chairman says his party will present a draft after consultation, if necessary, for the revival of the courts


News Desk March 04, 2017
Chairman Pakistan People's Party (PPP) Bilawal Bhutto Zardari talking to media in Islamabad on March 4, 2017. EXPRESS NEWS SCREEN GRAB

Pakistan People's Party (PPP) chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari on Saturday said his party is against the re-establishment of military courts, but said that they will formulate a draft on the matter after due consultation.

"We have reservations about military courts and are opposed to their restoration," Bilawal told media men in Islamabad.

"We will present a draft after consultation with our lawyers if, deemed necessary, for the revival of military courts," he said.

Bilawal supported sisters in revolt against Zardari

Bilawal criticised the government for a "complete and utter failure and criminal negligence to implement the National Action Plan (NAP) and not performing necessary reforms that would not have required discussion on re-establishment of military courts."

All political parties developed a consensus and went through a lot of brainstorming to develop NAP, he recalled.

Fata reforms

On the reforms for Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata), Bilawal said its merger with Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, if not implemented immediately, would be tantamount to "fraud with the masses." "We deem it imperative that the merger takes place as soon as possible," he said.

Will become country's prime minister in 2018, says Bilawal

The PPP chairman also condemned "racial profiling of a single community" and said his party condemns such a move and would make efforts to ensure it doesn't happen in future. Bilawal was referring to a recent alleged notification by the Punjab government which asked members of Pashtun community to get their credentials checked.

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