ISLAMABAD: In an unusual turn of events, lawmakers in the National Assembly adopted a resolution on Thursday slamming two of their own colleagues — Imran Khan and Sheikh Rashid Ahmad — for cursing parliament during Wed­nesday’s protest in Lahore.

But at a press conference held shortly afterwards, a defiant Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) chief brushed aside the criticism and doubled down on his remarks, saying he didn’t care if the assembly passed a hundred resolutions against him.

Earlier, the lower house saw parliamentarians from both sides of the aisle lambaste the PTI chief and his ally from Rawalpindi for cursing the legislature while addressing the Pakistan Awami Tehreek-led protest in Lahore a day earlier.

Introduced by Federal Minister Baleeghur Reh­man, the resolution was passed minutes after the PTI lawmakers left the house after their attempt to point out quorum and derail proceedings failed.

PTI chief rejects criticism; PPP distances itself from anti-parliament remarks

Earlier, some PTI members kept trying to speak, but Deputy Speaker Murtaza Javed Abbasi did not allow them the opportunity, saying they should wait their turn. Even Leader of the Opposition Syed Khursheed Shah tried to intercede on their behalf, but PTI lawmakers’ names were only called after the resolution against their party chief had been adopted — by which time they had left the house.

However, members from all other parties bitterly criticised Mr Khan and Sheikh Rashid for their outrageous comments, calling for them to be summoned before the house privileges committee over “contempt of parliament”.

Members were even of the view that if they refuse to turn up voluntarily, the two men should be arrested and produced before the committee.

“This house strongly condemns the repeated use of words Laanat (curse) and Laanti (accursed) by PTI chairman Imran Khan and self-proclaimed president of a political party, Shaikh Rashid, at a public meeting in Lahore,” the resolution said.

It maintained that both men had “made intentional attempts to damage the respect and dignity of the constitutional house of which they also happen to be members”, adding that since it represented the people of Pakistan, derogatory remarks against parliament were tantamount to insulting the 200 million people of the country.

Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif contended that while the opposition might have the right to criticise or even abuse the government, no one would be allowed to curse, abuse or belittle parliament.

He said both Mr Khan and Mr Rashid had come crawling back to parliament after handing in their resignations during the 2014 sit-in, adding that they had no shame, respect or dignity.Noting that both men had breached the privilege of the house, he requested the chair to constitute a privilege committee, adding that both men should be made to appear before it, by force if necessary.

Terming the abusive language used for parliament “painful”, Opposition Lea­der Syed Khursheed Shah asked Imran Khan what options he would have if there was no parliament.

“Do you want a dictator to lock up parliament and then bow before him?” he asked, adding that it would not make a difference if someone wanted to resign.

A day after PPP co-chairperson Asif Ali Zardari shared the Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) stage with the PTI chief — at different times though — Mr Shah said the PPP had never insulted institutions, even when cases were framed against its leadership.

He said their elected prime minister was shown the door, but still they did not curse or insult the institution.

Mr Zardari also reacted to the anti-parliamentary remarks of his counterpart, saying “Parliament cannot be blamed for its legislative business, which is set by the government and not the elected house itself.”

Addressing a party meeting at the Bilawal House in Lahore, he argued that the government and not parliament should be blamed the passage of a controversial law.

PPP chairperson Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari also tweeted his response to Mr Khan’s anti-parliamentary remarks, saying: “The PPP respects parliament and will always respect parliament. Cannot help the behaviour of others but will never endorse disrespecting parliament.”

Devil-may-care

Adopting a devil-may-care attitude towards the National Assembly resolution, Mr Khan told reporters at Banigala that he wanted to use even “harsher” words to describe parliament.

“Parliament is the name of a building. It is the parliamentarians who make this institution great or bring it down,” he said, trying to justify his remarks, where he cursed the legislature and termed lawmakers laanti (accursed).

He said he could not respect a parliament that passed a law allowing a “criminal” to become the head of a political party. By electing a “money launderer” to head the ruling party, Mr Khan said the party had allowed a “thief” access to Pakistan’s coffers.

Referring to Khawaja Asif’s remarks on the National Assembly floor, Mr Khan said it was people like him that brought parliament a bad name. He accused the foreign minister of being involved in money laundering, alleging that he was employed by a firm in Dubai and receiving Rs1.6 million as salary.

The PTI chief also urged the judiciary to expedite a case against the foreign minister, filed by a PTI member over his Iqama.

Mr Khan dubbed the minister a “security risk” for the country, alleging that during the foreign minister’s recent visit to Washington, he spoke the language of US President Donald Trump when he said that Pakistan needed to keep its own house in order.

When asked if the PTI was considering resigning from the assembly, Mr Khan said that no such decision had been made so far, but the issue was being debated within the party.

Later, the PTI chief tweeted: “When a parliament, which must protect nation’s interests, passes a person-specific law allowing a disqualified person guilty of Rs 3bn [in] money laundering, tax evasion, concealment of assets, forgery & perjury to become head of a political party, then such a law is a “laanat” (curse) on parliament.”

Describing his choice of words as “mild”, he challenged those who disagreed with him to conduct a public poll on what people think of such a parliament. “I can guarantee most will condemn it,” he tweeted.

Published in Dawn, January 19th, 2018