Discontented activists: As polls near, PPP Peshawar chapter crumbles from within

Resignations and reshuffling within the party have left many members unhappy.


Manzoor Ali April 28, 2013
Resignations and reshuffling within the party have left many members unhappy. PHOTO: FILE

PESHAWAR:


The Peshawar chapter of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) seems to be on shaky ground with elections around the corner, as the persistent wrangling within its ranks has led to the resignation and reshuffling of some members.


The issue came to light following the resignation of Haji Sharif Khan, PPP’s provincial finance secretary and election hopeful for the PK-9 Peshawar constituency.

Sharif resigned from the PPP and joined the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F), where he was awarded a party ticket to contest from the PK-9 seat. Sharif’s name is on the JUI-F’s final list of party nominees which was issued three days ago.

Meanwhile, PPP Peshawar District Senior Vice President Sartaj Khan’s position was taken over by Zafar Khan and the District Information Secretary Amir Zeb was also replaced, leaving a lot of anger brewing in the party’s ranks.

Sources within the PPP said the issue was deep-rooted and linked to a senior leader who quit the party some time ago. The unnamed leader attempted to take Sharif and Sartaj with him but they refused. When Anwar Saifullah Khan took over as Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) president, he managed to woo back the senior leader who also happens to be Saifullah’s relative.

One of the sources further added a group of landlords did not like party activists and were unhappy with the PPP’s Peshawar chief, Malik Tehmash Khan, as he had been an activist too.

Expressing concerns about the party’s chances in the election, the source said PPP’s position in Peshawar had deteriorated to such an extent that it may not be able to win another seat from the district, except perhaps PK-2 which is thought of as a mini-Larkana and has repeatedly been won by former minister Syed Zahir Ali Shah. However, Anwar Ali Safi, a PPP worker and hopeful for PK-2, rebelled against the ticket for the constituency being awarded to Zahir Ali Shah, choosing to contest independently.

Another source within the party informed The Express Tribune Safi had not been allocated a ticket in 2008 as well. According to the source, this time he refused to be sidelined saying the party should take activists into consideration too and not always issue tickets to the bigwigs.

In another twist, inside sources revealed the party’s candidate for NA-3 Peshawar-III and candidates for three PK seats from the NA-3 constituency were trying to topple each other. Former assembly member, Noor Alam Khan is contesting elections from NA-3, while former K-P assembly speaker Kiramatullah Chagarmati is contesting from PK-7. PPP Peshawar president Malik Tehmash Khan is contesting from PK-8 and Iftikhar Jhagra is contesting from PK-9.

In a separate issue, yet another source claimed a PPP lawmaker even donated Rs50,000 to the JUI-F a few months ago.  “The leadership was aware of the lawmaker’s overtures towards the JUI-F.  However, his good terms with Faryal Talpur saved him,” the source alleged.

Meanwhile, District President Malik Tehmash Khan, when contacted denied any differences within the party’s ranks in Peshawar, adding the decision to appoint, sack or replace an official is made by the provincial leadership and everyone is obliged to comply.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 28th, 2013.

[tableau name="Electionresults2002-2008/Electionresultdashboard" static_image=" http://public.tableausoftware.com/static/images/El/Electionresults2002-2008/Electionresultdashboard/1_rss.png"]

COMMENTS (2)

Shahid Shah | 11 years ago | Reply

PPP, ANP and JUIF, PML are all same old status quo. No more interest in them.

Zeeshan | 11 years ago | Reply

Practically there is no difference between JUI-F and PPP. They all will always plunder the nation. How foolish as a nation we are.

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