0
LAHORE/ISLAMABAD, Aug 27: The PML-Q and the MMA on Wednesday appeared to have made some headway towards untying the Gordian knot of the LFO as the interlocutors agreed to take the controversial constitutional amendment to parliament, ostensibly on terms proposed by the ruling party.
The religious parties alliance took back its earlier threat that it would withdraw from the talks if the package was not finalized by Aug 28.
Further give-and-take which led to the softening of the MMA’s stand on various disputes remains a closely guarded secret as neither side would say a word which could jeopardize further progress.
The two sides met a day after an uncompromizing stand taken by Gen Pervez Musharraf on the status of the LFO and the possible consequences for the entire system in case it was withdrawn.
The talks were held at the residence of PML-Q senator S.M. Zafar where party chief Chaudhry Shujaat Husain and Tariq Aziz, a close aide of Gen Musharraf and secretary of the National Security Council, were also present.
The MMA was represented by deputy secretary-generals Liaquat Baloch and Hafiz Husain Ahmad, both MNAs.
The ruling party has proposed that the procedure adopted at the time of the Eighth Amendment should be followed this time as well to steer the country out of the 10-month constitutional crisis.
The president’s military uniform, which is the major irritant to the opposition, remained in focus for quite some time in Wednesday’s talks and discussion on the separation of the two offices would be examined further in the next round of what is being billed as the “consultative talks.”
It is said that the ruling party wants that the president should not be forced to get himself elected anew through his electoral college. If he takes confidence vote from parliament and provincial assemblies, this should be deemed sufficient, they hold the view.
Briefing reporters after the talks, Mr Baloch termed them positive, saying some decisions had been taken but these would be disclosed only when they took a final shape after consultation with the top leaders.
Referring to Gen Musharraf’s statement, he said such statements could sabotage the talks and spread despair among the masses.
Chaudhry Shujaat said they had managed to end the deadlock in the talks and that was what Gen Musharraf too wanted.
He said both the parties had taken part in the talks while sticking to their respective stands.
Hafiz Husain Ahmad said the agreed points would be made public within a couple of days. He said both the parties would adhere to their stances until the constitutional package was finalized.
Mr Zafar said they were seriously busy in solving the crisis and believed that politicians could make anything possible out of the impossible.
In a related development, MMA chairman Maulana Shah Ahmad Noorani told reporters here on Wednesday that the next summit meeting of the religious alliance would set a deadline for the ongoing talks. The meeting was likely to be convened in the first week of September, he added.
ARD: The Alliance for Restoration of Democracy has rejected President Pervez Musharraf’s statement that if the LFO was repealed parliament could have to go and termed it an empty threat to dissolve the assemblies.
Talking to newsmen at his residence here on Wednesday, PML-N acting president Makhdoom Javed Hashmi said through this statement Gen Musharraf wanted to convey his threat to the opposition members that if they did not accept the LFO, he would dissolve the assemblies.
Mr Hashmi said Gen Musharraf could not dissolve the assemblies as he knew that the day he did so it would be his last day in power. “People will throw his dissolution order into the dustbin like they rejected his referendum,” he added.
He said the ARD was struggling for the supremacy of parliament and at the same time it was also ready to face new elections.
Commenting on Gen Musharraf’s statement that he would take action against those who would try to break the country, he said the country had been “damaged only by the army generals.”
The country was disintegrated when Gen Yahya was in power but he escaped punishment just because he was a general, he added.
The PML-N leader said Gen Musharraf was working on his “personal agenda” and his policies did not have people’s support. He said the State Bank governor had admitted that no investment had been made in the country in the last four years, which was a proof of the government’s failed economic policies.
He criticized the National Assembly speaker for not playing his role as the custodian of the house. Mr Hashmi said the speaker should have expunged the unparliamentary words used by MNA Tanveer Hussain on the day they were uttered, but he waited to expunge those remarks for almost 24 hours and that too only when pointed out by women opposition members.
He urged the speaker to change his attitude otherwise his effigies would be burnt in all cities of the country.
Meanwhile, parliamentary leader of the People’s Party Parliamentarians in Senate Mian Raza Rabbani said the government’s reassertion that the elections, assemblies, joint electorate, women’s seat and increase in seats were linked to the acceptance of the LFO was incorrect.
In a statement issued here on Wednesday, the PPP senator said the elections were held under the Conduct of General Elections Order, 2002, which was issued on Feb 27, 2002.
He said the Elections Order provided for the increase in seats in Senate and assemblies and covered the question of joint electorate, voting age and the educational qualification of the members.
He said Article 8G of the order stated: “The election held under this Order shall be deemed to have been held under the Constitution and shall have effect accordingly.” The Constitution, he said, had been defined in Article 2(b) of the said order as the Constitution of 1973.
Mr Rabbani said the LFO was promulgated on Aug 21, 2002, when the election process was well underway. Moreover, the Supreme Court in a constitutional petition (Watan Party versus the Chief Executive and others) on Oct 7, 2002, also declared that the elections were being held under the Conduct of General Elections Order 2002.
The SC observed: “The elected parliament is in immediate sight and obviously parliament and not this court is the appropriate forum to consider all these amendments. We may further observe that the procedure to amend the Constitution as enshrined in Article 239, Part XI remains unaltered. The parliament retains same power to amend the Constitution as it did before the promulgation of the LFO.”
He said it was, therefore, clear that the LFO had nothing to do with the elections and present assemblies.
