Allaying concerns: Misrepresenting army’s support is a sin, says PAT

Qadri’s party accuses political outfits of trying to drag the army and court into a political matter

ISLAMABAD:

Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) on Tuesday dispelled fears of parliamentarians about the protesting parties ‘misrepresentation’ of the army’s support for their ongoing sit-ins in Islamabad.

“Anyone misrepresenting support of the army is committing a political sin as misrepresentation is permissible neither in the law nor under ethics,” said the PAT in a reply submitted in the Supreme Court on Tuesday.



The party’s reply sought to address the three questions raised on September 10 by the Awami National Party (ANP) and Balochistan National Party-Awami (BNP-A) before the apex court.

The parties had asked as to whether any group could seek to disengage a prime minister from his office under threat of violence; whether a political leader could legitimately involve Pakistan Army in his design to achieve his unconstitutional objectives and whether a political leader could misrepresent support for Pakistan Army.

Giving reply to these questions, PAT’s counsel Ali Zafar said the ANP and the BNP-A should withdraw such ‘wanton assertions’ attributed to their party or its leaders as the PAT believes that Pakistan Army is the army of the people of Pakistan and believes in democracy and the rights of the people.

“These are hypothetical and academic questions, and it is well established that the honourable courts do not deal with such theoretical queries or delve in such speculative matters,” the reply said.

It claimed that the parties were unnecessarily dragging the name of Pakistan Army in a debate before the court. “Pakistan Army is involved in very serious and sensitive matters at present which include defence of the borders, Operation Zarb-e-Azab, maintaining law and order and helping save lives of millions during the current floods,” it said.

The reply said the ANP and BNP-A were also making an attempt to involve the apex court in a political matter in spite of the fact that court had repeatedly expressed its desire to keep out of these issues.

“It is strange that while the ANP and the BNP are submitting that the court should not delve into political questions, this question as well as the other two questions raised are political [in nature],” it said.

As to demanding the PM’s resignation, the PAT said it is the right of every person to raise the demand for resignation of any office bearer including prime minister or the chief minister of province or any minister(s) in any federal government or provincial governments.

“The resignation of the prime minister and chief minister are duly provided in the Constitution in Article 91(6) and 130(6). There is hence nothing ‘unconstitutional’ in demanding the resignation of the prime minister or the chief minister,” it claimed.

PAT said it was demanding the resignation of Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif for his involvement in the June 17 Model Town clashes, which left at least 14 dead and over 80 injured.

“[As] the Punjab police, which fall under the ultimate control and authority of the chief minister of Punjab, opened indiscriminate and barbaric firing and ruthlessly killed 14 and injured hundreds of innocent men, women and children in broad daylight,” it said.

In response to the second question, the PAT said they had welcomed the government’s decision to ask army chief General Raheel Sharif to mediate because they wanted the issues to be resolved.

“However, the debate between the government’s cabinet members [whether it was facilitation, mediation or arbitration] spoiled this possibility,” the PAT said, as it requested the court to dispose of the case without any further orders.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 17^th, 2014.