MLAs take back no-confidence motion against AJK PM

Move comes after PM Nawaz asked PML-N members to stay impartial on the issue.


Web Desk July 26, 2013
AJK PM Chaudhry Abdul Majeed. PHOTO: AFP

MUZAFFARABAD: The no-confidence motion – moved against Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) Prime Minister Chaudhry Abdul Majid – was taken back on Friday, Express News reported.

The move comes after Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif asked Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz’s (PML-N) members to stay impartial on the issue.

Two members of the Azad Kashmir Legislative Assembly (MLAs) from the ruling Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) had submitted the no-trust motion against him on July 22 in a surprise attempt to bring an in-house change in the assembly.

“Prime Minister Chaudhry Abdul Majid [has] failed to deliver [on his promise of] good governance, implement merit and root out corruption in government departments,” alleged the MLAs, Majid Khan and Muhammad Hussain Sargala, in the charge-sheet they submitted to the assembly’s secretary, Chaudhry Basharat.

This was the fourth time a no-confidence motion was moved against a sitting AJK prime minister. Three earlier motions were successfully passed and the premiers were sent home packing.

COMMENTS (5)

mason | 7 years ago | Reply You've made some decent points presently there. I seen the internet for your issue and discovered most individuals should go along with along with your website.
Roni | 8 years ago | Reply @jibran: I agree with you fully. Noon party would try to do the same in Sindh; this was only a trial balloon in AJK assembly. Gen Zia, and NS govt have done this in Sindh repeatedly and there is no shortage of Mir Jafers and Mir Sadiqs in all the provinces of Pakistan. The law and order situation in Karachi would be made worse and there would be an excuse that Sindh govt failed to make a change either with governor rule or in-house with the help of elements who cannot live without power.
VIEW MORE 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