The opposition parties in Sindh will submit a resolution against the Muttahida Qaumi Movement’s (MQM) demand to set up administrative units in Sindh in the assembly today. The issue may be taken up during the upcoming session on Thursday.
The opposition parties, nationalists, writers and activists in Sindh have joined hands to condemn the MQM’s demand, saying they will not support any unconstitutional demands that are a direct threat to the integrity of Pakistan. The decision was made during an all-parties conference, convened by the Qaumi Awami Tehreek (QAT) and Jamiat-e-Ulema Pakistan (JUP), at the residence of JUP secretary-general Maulana Owais Ahmed Noorani on Tuesday.
The resolution will be submitted on Wednesday, confirmed Pakistan Muslim League-Functional (PML-F) MPA and the opposition leader in the assembly Shaharyar Mahar. “It [resolution] will clarify who supports it and who does not,” he said.
“A historical consensus was built today when not even a single party supported such demand,” claimed QAT president Ayaz Latif Palijo. “This is an unacceptable demand to the people of Sindh.”
Palijo said that the participants at the conference agreed that the future of Sindh and the rest of the country should not be compromised for the sake of political and personal interests. “The country is facing a number of political, social and economic issues,” Palijo read out from the resolution signed at the conference. “Thousands of people are homeless due to the floods and the ongoing operation against terrorists. There is inflation, unemployment, and terrorism.”
More than 20 parties, including Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), PML-F, Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Islam, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (F), Jamaat-e-Islami, Jeay Sindh Qaumi Mahaz, Sindh United Party, Balochistan National Party, Awami National Party, Sunni Tehreek, Pashtoonkhwa Mili Awami Party, PPP-Shaheed Bhutto, Kutchi Rabita Committee and others participated in the conference, which was also attended by former Sindh chief ministers, Dr Arbab Ghulam Rahim and Liaquat Ali Jatoi.
“Neither urban Sindhi nor rural Sindh is in favour of a division of Sindh as it is an issue of Pakistan’s integrity,” said PTI provincial president Nadir Akmal Laghari. “Sindh’s division won’t be accepted.” Laghari claimed the MQM demand will spread hatred.
Meanwhile, PML-N Sindh president Muhamamd Ismail Rahoo said that no one would be allowed to weaken the Constitution. “It is a historical consensus in the history of Pakistan that all parties are united against the division of Sindh,” he said.
“We have repeated again and again that it is an unacceptable demand,” said PML-F’s Mahar. Dr Rahim also claimed that the people of Sindh do not want a division. The chief minister has a majority in the assembly and no one can stop any political party if it has a majority, he said.
“There is no space for new provinces in the country,” said Jatoi. “It is the result of rigging that a political party dares to demand a separate province,” he added. “We’ll fight till our last breath but won’t accept it.”
The ruling PPP’s Senator Saeed Ghani also ruled out the creation of new administrative units. “The demand is out of question,” he said.
MQM wants to ‘reorganise’ Sindh
The MQM insisted, however, that it never called for the division of Sindh. MQM leader Farooq Sattar told The Express Tribune that he fails to understand why political parties are opposing the formation of administrative units in Sindh.
“Are they holding such events because of their animosity towards the MQM?” Sattar said his party never called for division of Sindh. “We want Sindh to be reorganised. In fact, the entire country should be reorganised,” he said, adding this was a century of decentralisation since economy dictates politics. “Decentralisation does not mean the division of any existing province but it means more autonomy and administrative powers,” he said.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 24th, 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