Toppling Zehri: MPAs blame ethnic party for change of govt

Say Centre had ignored the province; announce they will contest elections from one platform


Mohammad Zafar January 19, 2018
PHOTO: FILE

QUETTA: A number of Balochistan Assembly lawmakers on Thursday defended their decision to bring a change in the provincial government, alleging that an ethnic party had held the provincial government and former chief minister Sanaullah Zehri hostage throughout the tenure.

Talking to the media at a luncheon hosted by Mir Faiq Jamali at his residence, the lawmakers claimed that the government had ignored their legitimate demands and rights as the said ethnic party ruled supreme in the coalition government.

Sharif terms change of Balochistan CM a joke with people

They also rejected reports that any federal party was playing a role in Balochistan’s politics and said they would contest the next elections under the banner of a unified Muslim League or any of the PML faction.

“We are not going to join a central political party,” the MPA said, burying the rumours that certain members of the Balochistan Assembly are going to join the Pakistan Peoples Party.

The legislators claimed that funds worth more than Rs15 billion from the federal government and Rs20 billion from the provincial government had lapsed, and blamed the ethnic party for maladministration, inefficiency and corruption.

Those who addressed the media included Prince Ahmed Ali, Sardar Mohammad Saleh Bhootani, Mir Jan Mohammad Jamali, Haji Mohammad Khan Lehri, Sarfraz Bugti, Anwarul Haq Kakar, Ghulam Dastagir Badini, Haji Akbar Askani, Mir Aamir Rind, Tahir Mahmood and Mir Faiq Jamali.

They argued that there were some adverse comments made on the recent developments in Balochistan, and after consultation they had decided to collectively respond to those comments and speculation.

Anwarul Haq Kakar said that members belonging to the PML-N, PML-Q, ANP, BNP-Mengal, BNP-Awami and JUI-F as well as independent MPs had unanimously agreed that the provincial government had failed in defending the legitimate rights of Balochistan and its people. The process of development had stopped causing a sharp sense of deprivation, he claimed.

“We had informed the federal government in advance but they never took notice,” another MPA told the media. He said that they had taken the step in the greater interest of the people of Balochistan.

Kakar, meanwhile, said the new government had taken a serious notice of the recent recruitments made in the provincial information department. He claimed that the political constituents of a certain MPA were given jobs which violated merit. However, the government would take notice following a court verdict, he added.

Kakar declared that all Muslim League candidates would take part in the next elections from a single platform.

Sardar Mohammad Saleh Bhootani, a former caretaker chief minister, said it was unfair that the Asian Development Bank funds were used for building roads in Balochistan, shown as a project of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).

Balochistan CM Zehri quits to avoid no-trust vote

He also claimed that the government had failed to explain CPEC and its objectives in Balochistan. He was of the view that the most important route is the western route and the government was yet to start work on it.

Mir Jan Mohammed Jamali, another former chief minister, said the government should hold a judicial inquiry over the abuse of public and development funds. He demanded of the government to allocate Senate seats to districts, and called for support from the political parties operating at the national level.

Prince Ahmed Ali claimed that Rs15 billion from the federal funds and Rs20 billion from the provincial funds lapsed every year and the government failed to utilise those funds.

Deputy Opposition Leader Zamruk Khan said they used the no-confidence motion after a former minister levelled charges of buying and selling of votes.

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