PML-N leader Javed Latif on Tuesday called for more aggressive actions against former prime minister Imran Khan, demanding booking of him on several charges while also urging his conviction regarding the May 9 incident.
Addressing a news conference, the PML-N leader termed the Supreme Court’s decision of overturning lifetime disqualification a first step towards a level-playing field.
Latif, a minister without portfolio in the outgoing PDM government, asserted that Imran Khan still enjoyed support, shielding him from conviction in the May 9 incident. He called for intensified measures against the incarcerated former prime minister for threatening the judiciary, ECP, and state institutions.
Moreover, he regretted remarks given by the caretaker prime minister – who was single-handedly picked by his party – regarding the May 9 incidents.
He added that the premier’s uncertainty regarding Imran Khan's involvement in the riots was beyond comprehension, particularly given his time in power for several months.
He highlighted that the absence of any application from the ECP against Imran Khan served as proof of the latter's ongoing support.
Expressing regret, he noted the “lack of comprehensive media coverage” regarding Imran Khan's alleged threats to an ECP official while in jail.
He further accused the media of inadequately highlighting the significance of the cypher issue, asserting that Imran Khan's survival in that case was yet another instance of the support he enjoys.
He pointed out the presence of powerful figures exerting pressure on the judiciary to avoid convictions, questioning why there had been no conviction in the cypher case despite seven months having elapsed.
“Is it not a weakness of our institutions?”
Read PPP, PML-N bigwigs meet US, UK envoys
The former federal minister asked whether Pakistan was a ‘slum’ with no rule of law where the former PTI chief rules as a gang leader operating with impunity, freely abusing and threatening individuals while expecting courts to comply with his whimsical demands.
He urged the judiciary to swiftly deliver a verdict on the May 9 incident.
Stressing a clear distinction between other political leaders and Imran Khan, he said that the latter was not a political figure but rather a thug.
He said it was being alleged that international forces conspired against Imran. “Why would they, what did he do for Pakistan?” he asked. “Why would international forces, that want to destabilise a Pakistan, conspire against a person, who did nothing for his country?”
Surprisingly, despite the recent series of reliefs granted to PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif and his party, Javed Latif commented that the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Nawaz Sharif's lifetime disqualification was merely an initial stride toward establishing a fair ground for competition.
He expressed that a truly level playing field would entail further decisions to rectify injustices previously imposed on them.
During his interaction with the media, a journalist later asked Javed about his definition of a level playing field and whether it meant arresting his adversaries and hanging them all.
However, in response, Javed dismissed both the question and the line of inquiry, reiterating his stance that if May 9 constituted a crime, the perpetrators ought to face appropriate punishment.
He also took jibe at Bilawal Bhutto stating that a person whose father does not take him seriously is not worth talking about.
Furthermore, he said that announcing ten points during a speech that revolved around giving handouts was not a manifesto. “Such speeches are made by political leaders in every rally. A manifesto should mean a pragmatic road map for a political party to act on when in power.”
Javed said that he was against any seat adjustment in Punjab, as the first right to contest should be of those who have stood by the party in thick and thin.
He also announced that party leadership would be announcing its rally schedule in a day or two.
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