data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ae583/ae5835dddd4e617eca9118d04b6592cf0f451983" alt="members of the tehreek e labaik pakistan gather during a sit in in rawalpindi november 17 2017 photo reuters members of the tehreek e labaik pakistan gather during a sit in in rawalpindi november 17 2017 photo reuters"
Terming the situation critical for national security, the adjournment motion stated that the government’s strategy to end the protest had cast doubts over domestic security and the rule of law.
Faizabad fiasco: Police reveal why crackdown went awry
“On the orders of the court, the way in which the government surrendered before [the] protesters and struck a deal via armed forces to end the sit-in is a glaring example of its incompetence,” read the motion that was signed, among others, by Dr Nafisa Shah, Syed Naveed Qamar and Ijaz Jakhrani.
It said that the government allowed everyone – who created the law and order situation and resorted to destruction of property – to get away, putting people’s lives at risk.
“The government has set a shameful precedent by entering into this agreement with the protesters, harming national sovereignty,” the motion read.
Earlier, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) lashed out at the government and over the army’s role as mediator to end the sit-in at the Faizabad Interchange.
The sit-in, lasting more than 20 days, was called off after an agreement was struck between the Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan and the government.
Faizabad sit-in wasn't about Khatme Nabuwat, but a sectarian conspiracy: Ahsan Iqbal
A few points of the agreement drew the ire of many stakeholders.
Under the accord, the government agreed to release all persons arrested since November 6 and withdraw cases against them. “Federal and provincial governments must compensate for all damages to state and private properties ever since the start of the sit-in,” another point of the agreement stated.
Earlier, Leader of Opposition in the National Assembly Syed Khursheed Shah also criticised the government for not taking the matter to parliament.
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