Bahadurabad faction has five de-facto RC chiefs: Farooq Sattar

Says his vision is one-chief led RC


News Desk February 27, 2018
Farooq Sattar. PHOTO: EXPRESS

[fbvideo link="https://www.facebook.com/etribune/videos/2223402824343398/?notif_id=1519727333307131&notif_t=live_video_explicit"]

Muttahida Qaumi Movement – Pakistan (MQM-P) leader Dr Farooq Sattar has said the Bahadurabad faction of his party will not survive the upcoming general elections if they continue with the policy of having five chiefs leading Raabita Committee (RC).

Speaking to the media on Tuesday after a meeting in Islamabad, attended by Kamran Tessori, Syed Ali Raza Abidi, Kishwer Zehra and others, Sattar maintained that he was adamant on his principles as he believes a party cannot be led by too many chiefs.

“Even right now they have two chiefs; where one [Khalid Maqbool Siddiqui] says the party will not move courts against me, the other [Aamir Khan] wants to drag the matter to the court,” he told media.

Sattar said the Bahadurabad faction currently had five de-facto chiefs. “Khalid bhai has got a post of leadership where he will not actually be running party affairs but receiving instructions from four other people,” he added.

ECP gives Farooq Sattar two days to submit reply on petitions filed by Bahadurabad group

The MQM-P leader stressed he could not work in such a scenario. “The person with most votes in intra-party elections is elected as president as per constitution,” he said. "My vision is one-chief led RC."

Referring to the Election Commission of Pakistan hearing held earlier in the day, Sattar pointed out that he did not approach the commission or courts against RC. “They are taking matters to the ECP and court,” he said. “I could have filed an appeal in civil court against their petition to the ECP removing me as party chief.”

“I did not use the option of requesting court for a stay order to stop the ECP hearing.”

 

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

E-Publications

Most Read