ISLAMABAD: The Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (Fazl) has suggested amendments to tone down what it perceives as the “cruel” Protection of Pakistan Ordinance (PPO).

One of the proposed amendments envisages reduction in the period of detention of terror suspects by security forces, without disclosure of their whereabouts and the nature of charges against them, from 90 days to 30.

A set of amendments was presented by a four-member JUI-F delegation during a meeting with Science and Technology Minister Zahid Hamid here on Tuesday, also attended by Law Secretary Barrister Zafarullah Khan and Interior Secretary Shahid Khan.

The JUI-F delegation comprised the party’s parliamentary leader in the National Assembly, Akram Durrani, Supreme Court Bar Association President Kamran Murtaza, Senator Hafiz Hamdullah and Qari Abdul Rashid.

But the meeting remained inconclusive and the participants are likely to meet again on Thursday.

During the meeting, the JUI-F team opposed section 2(d) of the ordinance and suggested that instead of declaring a person as an enemy alien for his failure to prove his citizenship of Pakistan, he should be considered enemy alien only after it was declared by a ‘court’ that he was not a citizen of the country and was involved in war or insurrection against the country.

The amended PPO was promulgated by the government on Jan 22 and its life was extended for another 120 days by the National Assembly on Feb 7. The law is still pending before a standing committee of the assembly and awaiting its approval.

The Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf, Jamaat Islami and Muttahida Qaumi Movement are opposing the PPO and have declared it a “draconian law aimed at crushing political parties which gives the agencies license to kill”.

JUI-F proposals suggest that parliament, not the federal government, should decide the date of enforcement of the ordinance.

Another proposals seeks the addition of “on the directive of a special judicial magistrate,” in section 3(1) of the ordinance that says that a police officer or member of armed forces or civil armed forces can use force to prevent the commission of a scheduled offence on reasonable apprehension of commission of the offence and after giving sufficient warning.

Similarly section 3(2 a), the JUI-F team proposed, should be amended to the effect that “after giving prior warning but subject to directive of a special judicial magistrate” police or civil armed forces could use force as might be deemed necessary.

The party also proposed an amendment to section 3(b and c) of the ordinance to disallow police or armed forces or civil armed forces to arrest a suspect or searching a place without warrant.

The JUI-F team wanted to see that a joint investigation team and civil armed forces under section 4 (1A and 1B) could withhold information about the whereabouts of a detained person only for 15 days.

Section 5(4) of the ordinance should be amended by allowing a special judicial magistrate to authorise from time to time the detention of a suspect for 30 days instead of 90 days, it proposed.

The party also wanted to delete section 5(5) of the ordinance which says that a person arrested or detained under the ordinance and whose identity is unascertainable should be considered an enemy alien and will be presumed to have joined insurrection against the country.