25 September 2004	Saturday	09 Shaban 1425

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

KARACHI, Sept 24: The opposition in Sindh assembly on Friday objected to the alleged demolition of certain old villages in Gadap town and sale of its land to builders.

This was contended by the parliamentary party leader of the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal Maulana Umar Sadiq while speaking on his adjournment motion, out of turn, with the permission of the speaker, Syed Muzaffar Hussain Shah.

The MMA parliamentary leader claimed that Malir Development Authority had allegedly done away with the old maps of the concerned goths and prepared new ones, on the basis of which land was being allotted to builders. His point of view was that law and order situation could be created by demolition of villages.

Senior parliamentarian Syed Qaim Ali Shah of the PPP Parliamentarians also supported Maulana Umar Sadiq and said that it would be a grave injustice to the people who had lived on the land for centuries.

Speaker Syed Muzaffar Hussain Shah directed the law minister to take up the matter with appropriate authority. Law minister Chaudhry Iftekhar Ahmed said the Malir Development Authority had been disbanded and merged with the Karachi city district government. A notification in this regard was issued a few days back.

He, however, said that Advisor on Local bodies would be asked to liaise with the city Nazim for resolving the issue. Ayaz Soomro of the PPP Parliamentarians complained that a huge quantity of shugdasi rice was being damaged because of the policies of the Trading Corporation of Pakistan.

The law minister assured the member that he would take up the matter with the agriculture minister. The house also deliberated on the privilege motion of the PPP Parliamentarian's Nawab Wassan whose grievance was that on Aug 16 he was detained at Taluka Mirpurkhas Police Station for 18 hours. He had complained that even after release, the SHO did not return his double cabin vehicle and driving license.

Speaking in support of Nawab Wassan, Syed Qaim Ali Shah contended that a member of the Sindh Assembly was himself complaining that he was illegally detained for 18 hours and was obstructed in the performance of his assignment, action should be ordered against the concerned officials.

He urged the assembly to take serious notice of such humiliation of elected representatives and his statement should be taken accordingly. Syed Qaim Ali Shah maintained that the law minister should not refer to the so-called FIR.

According to law, he claimed, an elected representative was VIP and he could make surprise checks of any thana, hospital and other organizations and the officials there were bound to provide him the required information.

But he pointed out that 15 assembly members of the opposition were detained or obstructed despite the law that no member can be arrested when the assembly was in session.

He pointed out that the governor had summoned the session on Aug 17 and on the same day, PPP Parliamentarians 18 members were arrested and were kept in Mirpurkhas. But they were released late in the night and as such they could not attend the assembly session.

He was of the view that the privilege motion should be sent to the standing committee in which MPAs and MNAs would give evidence. On Monday Nawab Wassan would make his submissions following which provincial law minister would wind up discussion on the privilege motion.

Earlier when the privilege motion was moved, the law minister, Ch Iftekhar Ahmed, had opposed it on the premise that on the night of Aug 16-17, two vehicles - a Honda Civic and a Toyota double cabin - moving towards Tharparkar from Mirpurkhas, were stopped at Naka Bandi.

The law minister had said that there were three persons in the double cabin vehicle. One of them, whom he identified as Nazir Wassan, was carrying an automatic rifle for which he had no licence. Similarly, their were no documents of the vehicle, he had informed the house.

In view of this, a case was registered under 13-D Arms Act while the vehicle was impounded as it was considered to be stolen. Ch Iftekhar had contended that report under 13-D was submitted before the judicial magistrate while the vehicle in question was placed under court's custody. His contention was that Nawab Wassan had only narrated the facts but had made no prayer for relief, nor quoted any provision of the relevant act.