![photo express photo express](https://i.tribune.com.pk/media/images/ptiJII1707907666-0/ptiJII1707907666-0.jpg)
A day after it took rain check on PTI’s offer to form a coalition government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (K-P), the Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) on Wednesday finally gave a thumbs down to cooperation with the party on a provincial level.
Despite ongoing discussions, the negotiations between PTI and JI reached a deadlock, leaving the formation of the government hanging in suspense.
The JI asserted that the matter was not merely about winning or losing; rather it was about the sacredness of the vote.
JI spokesperson Qaiser Sharif claimed that the PTI had "changed its stance" on cooperation in the upcoming government, stating that both parties had initially agreed to “cooperate at the national level in the national interest.”
Moreover, JI has planned to stage a dharna in Islamabad on Friday, protesting against alleged election rigging.
Within JI, a rift has surfaced regarding the prospect of joining forces with PTI to establish the provincial government.
Central Deputy Amir Liaquat Baloch had confirmed ongoing discussions with the PTI, revealing that the Imran-led party had signalled a willingness to collaborate for government formation.
However, on Wednesday, JI spokesperson Qaiser Sharif said the party's "cooperation with the PTI at the national level will be for national interest, but PTI has now changed their position".
جماعت اسلامی کے مرکزی نائب امیر لیاقت بلوچ نے مرکزی مشاورت اور میڈیا سے گفتگو کرتے ہوئے کہا کہ 8 فروری 2024ء کے انتخابات کے بعد پاکستان تحریک انصاف کے قائدین نے جماعت اسلامی سے رابطہ کیا کہ جماعت اسلامی اور تحریک انصاف نئی صورتحال میں مشترکہ حکمت عملی پر اتفاق کرے۔ اس کے فوری بعد… pic.twitter.com/ncs0cXbfGz
— Jamaat e Islami Pakistan (@JIPOfficial) February 14, 2024
“Jamaat will be happy with whoever the PTI allies with in K-P,” said Qaiser.
Baloch, speaking to the media, backed Qaiser’s stance stating that “there was talk of adjustment with the PTI at the national and provincial levels, not only in one province”.
According to JI’s statement, following the February 8 elections, the PTI contacted JI seeking a common strategy for government formation.
It added that the JI chief immediately consulted with the central leadership, and officials and established a committee consisting of the party's K-P chief Prof. Muhammad Ibrahim and Deputy Amir Inayatullah Khan under the leadership of Liaquat Baloch.
Baloch said the committee members contacted PTI’s Barrister Gohar Khan, Ali Amin Gandapur, Umar Ayub Khan and Azam Swati, and exchanged views on the poll results.
The statement added that the party informed the PTI of their concerns over the elections, stating that deliberately changing the poll results was a disgrace which would harm the country and democracy.
The party further said that it welcomes PTI-backed candidates who emerged victorious in the polls and offers them constitutional and parliamentary security and respect for the public's mandate at this difficult time for the party.
Read: MWM welcomes, JI weighs alliance offer from PTI
The party in its statement clarified that the PTI informed them of its desire to form a government only in K-P at the last stage of the inter-party discussions, after which the JI sought time for consulting its own leadership.
"If PTI requires JI's support to safeguard its independent candidates, we are open to the move and welcome the opportunity,” Baloch said.
Meanwhile, following the Jamaat-e-Islami's rejection of a coalition with PTI in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Sherani group has extended its hand in support of PTI.
The central spokesperson of the JUI-Sherani group, Shuja Mulk, conveyed in a statement that PTI stands independent and doesn't require additional alliances.
As Maulana Sherani's party, he emphasised that its alliance with PTI is rooted in the pursuit of true and real freedom. "Our platform is there for PTI," he added.
COMMENTS (2)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ