KARACHI:
For the second time in one week, lawmakers of the Sindh Assembly wreaked havoc in the House as they screamed and yelled at each other in the session on Tuesday.
Even those MPAs who had maintained a voluntary silence over the last nine months shouted slogans and tore copies of the day's agenda after the deputy speaker, Shehla Raza, termed the Muttahida Qaumi Movement's (MQM) adjournment motion to be against the rules.
The house echoed with slogans of 'Zalimo jawab do, khoon ka hisab do [Tyrants answer us, justify the bloodshed]' and 'Zulm ke ye zabite hum nahi maante [We do not accept these rules of tyranny]'. The ensuing chaos compelled the deputy speaker to adjourn the session without finishing the agenda.
The situation turned tense after the question-answer session, when the acting speaker gave the floor to the MQM MPAs for their adjournment motion on the 'extrajudicial killings' of their workers in Karachi. MQM's Muhammad Hussain and Aamir Moin Pirzada had requested to adjourn the session for two hours to discuss the issue. "This is a matter of urgent public importance," said Pirzada. "People living in Karachi are insecure and under threat."
The Pakistan Peoples Party's lawmakers, Dr Sikandar Mandhro and Nisar Khuhro, condemned the alleged 'extrajudicial killings' but felt that the adjournment motion was against the rules. "This is not a specific matter," challenged Dr Mandhro. "You have mixed up several issues such as the killings of your party's workers and the insecurity being felt by the citizens. All this seems to be hypothetical because no evidence has been presented to prove the allegations." He suggested the MQM MPAs to bring another adjournment motion according to the assembly's rules.
Meanwhile, MQM's parliamentary leader, Syed Sardar Ahmed, citing the report issued by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, reasoned that 'extrajudicial killings' were not a hypothetical case.
"People are being killed in fake encounters and several newspapers have reported it," he claimed, adding that the adjournment motion had been tabled as per the assembly's rules. "Please take up this important issue and let the lawmakers discuss it in this session," he pleaded.
Khuhro was, however, adamant that the motion was against the rules. "The motion is not maintainable," he asserted. "Furthermore, it is the prerogative of the speaker to take up the matter or reject it."
Khuhro's words seemed to irk the MQM lawmakers who suddenly stood up from their seats. The deputy speaker, meanwhile, declared it 'out-of-order', saying that the matter was not specific. At this, the MQM members were almost hysterical and started protesting, tearing up copies of the agenda and shouting, "Shame shame".
The ruckus made it difficult to understand what was going on in the session. The PPP members sat back comfortably in their seats while the MQM members screamed allegations against them.
Notwithstanding the commotion, the speaker decided to move things along and asked Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf MPA Khurram Sher Zaman to read his resolution, which was the next item on the agenda. Zaman's resolution, which was hardly heard or understood by any of the lawmakers, was adopted with a majority of votes. The resolution demanded the Election Commission of Pakistan hold the upcoming local government elections with the help of the biometric system.
The deputy speaker once again tried to calm the MQM lawmakers who paid no heed to her requests and continued to protest. She was ultimately forced to adjourn the session till Friday.
The protests did not end there as the PPP and MQM leaders continued to blame each for the 'unruly' attitude even after the session.
PPO survives yet another session
The leaders of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) have repeatedly criticised the Pakistan Protection Ordinance (PPO), calling it a ‘black law. They have, however, failed to adopt a resolution against it.
An example can be taken from the Sindh Assembly session on Tuesday. It was for the third time that a resolution against the PPO was on the agenda but members of both the parties did not take it seriously and created a ruckus on other issues, forcing the matter to be deferred until the next session. The resolution moved by MQM member, Kamran Akhtar, reads: “The house condemns and rejects the Pakistan Protection Ordinance which is not only in violation of the Constitution of Pakistan but also supersedes the judicial system and power of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.” Whether it was a deliberate or unintentional move, the chaos in the house has given benefit to the PPO thus far.
Committee to investigate Quaid’s birth place
The controversy surrounding Quaid-e-Azam’s birth place was raised in the session again on Tuesday. MQM’s parliamentary leader Syed Sardar Ahmed diverted the attention of the house towards a report that had appeared in some sections of the media claiming that, “Quaid-e-Azam was not a son of the soil”.
Sardar claimed he could produce documentary evidence that proved Jinnah was born in Karachi. He was referring to the famous speech delivered by the father of the nation on August 9, 1948, in which he had categorically pointed out his birth place in Karachi. “Some attribute Jhirk in Thatta district as the Quaid’s birth place,” he said. “No doubt, Jhirk Town was also part of Karachi at the time but it is not the birth place of the Quaid.”
Nisar Ahmed Khuhro and Dr Sikandar Mandhro of the PPP said that Quaid’s records regarding early education and birth place were available with the Sindh Madressatul Islam University where he had received his education before moving to Mumbai and London.
“We can form a house committee to end this controversy,” Khuhro suggested. Sharmila Faruqui referred to a study conducted by Nabi Bux Baloch on Jinnah’s birth place and said she would share its findings with the committee.
Ahmed rejected the idea of the formation of a committee, saying: “Karachi was the only birth place of the Quaid.”
Published in The Express Tribune, April 16th, 2014.
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