
Senate Chairman Yousuf Raza Gilani on Saturday took authorities to task for failing to produce incarcerated PTI Senator Ejaz Chaudhry, despite the issuance of production orders.
While PTI Senator Aon Abbas Buppi was presented, the repeated flouting of orders regarding Chaudhry prompted Gilani to refer the matter to the Privileges Committee.
Meanwhile, Buppi seized the moment to recount his ordeal to the House, expressing gratitude to Gilani for his "principled stance."
In his ruling, Gilani asserted: "Such disregard for parliamentary authority cannot be allowed to persist unchecked, as it threatens the institutional integrity of the Senate and the broader democratic framework."
He formally tasked the committee with reviewing the issue and submitting a report.
"I hereby refer the matter of non-implementation of the production orders concerning Senator Ejaz Chaudhry to the Privileges Committee for its consideration and report," he added.
While acknowledging Buppi's presence, Gilani noted, "However, yet again, the directives concerning Senator Ejaz Chaudhry have not been fulfilled, amounting to non-compliance with the lawful orders of the Chair."
He warned that ignoring Senate directives constituted a "breach of privilege" under Rule 71 of the Senate's Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business, 2012.
Citing a similar flouting of orders from his tenure as National Assembly speaker (1993-1997), Gilani recalled, "This is not an unprecedented situation," adding that he had been "compelled" to take similar action in the past.
He reaffirmed his commitment to upholding the rule of law and parliamentary supremacy.
Bappi details ordeal in House
Meanwhile, once presented in the Senate, Buppi narrated his ordeal, thanking Gilani for his "principled stance" and for refusing to preside over proceedings if both PTI senators were not produced.
Buppi also appreciated Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar for his "stand," saying it led to a reduction in "some of the hardships and oppression" against him.
Recounting the events of March 6, Buppi said that at 8:30 am, around 20 individuals forcefully entered his house in Multan, breaking the front door and restraining his house staff. Without naming any law enforcement agency, he claimed a "joint operation" was conducted, which also targeted his factory.
"I was sleeping with my wife when they banged the door so hard that the lock broke and they just entered," he said.
Buppi further alleged that the individuals demanded his mobile phones, and when he could not immediately produce them, they threatened to jail his 16-year-old son. His son was released only after a houseworker retrieved the phones.
Buppi recounted his court appearance, where he was sent on a one-day remand. Comparing his case to those of Fawad Chaudhry and Shehryar Afridi, he sarcastically referred to the charges against him as a "respectable FIR".
The PTI senator claimed his only "fault" was running an anti-inflation campaign in south Punjab, remaining loyal to PTI founder Imran Khan and advocating for jailed PTI leaders.
"These are my faults for which I have faced punishment for two days and might face it in the future as well," he remarked.
It is pertinent to note that Gilani had issued production orders for both PTI senators a day earlier, directing authorities to ensure their presence in Saturday's session. However, Chaudhry, who remains incarcerated at Lahore's Kot Lakhpat Jail, was once again not brought to the House.
Chaudhry's absence on Saturday marked the third unimplemented production order for him. In January, Gilani issued a similar order so Chaudhry could attend the January 14 Senate session, but he was not produced, prompting opposition lawmakers to stage a protest holding his pictures.
Chaudhry was first arrested on May 11, 2023, under Section 3 of the Maintenance of Public Order (MPO) in connection with the May 9 violence. Though the Islamabad High Court declared his detention under the MPO invalid, he was re-arrested on May 25 and transferred to Lahore.
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