Councillors cast ballots of their own accord

Forward blocs of PTI, PPP, JUI-F defy party discipline, LG legislation openly


Fawad Ali September 01, 2015
PHOTO: EXPRESS

PESHAWAR:


Whether it was due to the inability of the political leadership to enforce or their passive consent, a large number of councillors took the adage of going against the tide quite literally and voted in nazims and naib nazims who belonged to rival parties.


The issue of party discipline violation is no longer as simple as it sounds. After the passing of the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Local Government (Amendment) Act 2015, the mere act of casting ballots in favour of opponents is a violation of law.

Members of forward blocs in various parties, chiefly Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, Pakistan Peoples Party and Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl, were unimpressed with the candidates pitted by their own leadership and had their way with the ballots on Sunday.

Widening fissures

Despite performing well in the LG polls, PTI failed at maintaining discipline within its own ranks. In the provincial capital itself, a group of 30 councillors led by Younas Zahir and Iftikhar Khalil formed a bloc of its own. Similarly, the party is also divided into two factions in Buner. The dissident group, led by Syed Ikhtiyar Bacha, contested the district nazim polls and got 11 votes while the party nominee Afsar Khan managed to secure eight. Although the party has done well in Abbottabad, a group led by founding member Sher Bahadur reportedly defeated party nominees for nazim and naib nazim with help from PML-N. Furthermore, in Mansehra, another PTI forward bloc voted PML-N’s Sardar Said Rahman in.

Hour of concern

No matter how centralised a party it may sound, Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s JUI-F suffered heavily as a result of this mutiny. The party had 27 seats in the Lakki Marwat district council and was in a strong position to form its own LG. However, things changed overnight and by Sunday evening, a PPP nazim representing an alliance of PTI, PPP, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz and Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Sami was taking oath. it turned out four of JUI-F’s members defected.



The party met a similar fate in Chitral where it was earlier cutting a deal with Jamaat-e-Islami for the LG setup. Three of its councillors instead cast ballots in favour of All Pakistan Muslim League. Although it managed to form its government in Hangu, a forward bloc did emerge and vote for PTI. In Mardan’s Katlang tehsil, a group led by Maulana Imdadullah parted ways with Rehman and formed the government with JI.

No longer together?

As it continues to struggle against its own troubles, the PPP fired accusations towards JUI-F and even Awami National Party for violating the tripartite alliance agreement. “JUI-F made an alliance with JI in Chitral while ANP also sided with JI in Buner,” said PPP leader Najmuddin Khan. However, he was unable to produce a rebuttal when asked about PPP itself forming an alliance with PTI and JI in Lakki Marwat. The party had also announced its support of PTI in Mardan but after deliberations from the central leadership, it eventually sided with ANP’s Himayatullah Mayar. Najamuddin also assured the party will take action against all violators.

An ANP leader, requesting anonymity, said the alliance was formed to make PTI and JI uneasy; however, that never really happened. ANP’s Haroon Bilour also held JUI-F and PPP responsible for going against promises. “We rejected offers from PTI and PML-N for them. We could have formed governments in Torghar, Charsadda and Shangla easily.”

When approached for a comment, JUI-F K-P Information Secretary Jalil Jan said the party wishes to keep the alliance intact. “A tribunal has been formed to investigate the violations. Those found guilty will stand disqualified and dismissed from the party,” he said. He also accused PPP of reneging on its promises and supporting PTI in Peshawar, despite announcing a boycott.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 2nd,  2015.

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