ISLAMABAD, Feb 25: After imposing governor’s rule in Punjab, President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani jointly held a meeting of Pakistan People’s Party stalwarts in the Presidency on Wednesday and decided to establish ties with the Pakistan Muslim League-Q.

Sources in the PPP told Dawn the meeting, which lasted for over three hours, discussed the situation in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision against the Sharif brothers.

The meeting agreed that despite its differences with PML-Q, the PPP should establish “political ties” with that party. In this connection President Zardari might meet the Chaudhries of Gujrat soon, the sources said.

Mr Zardari decided to establish contacts with all political parties for what he called ‘saving democracy’.

The sources quoted President Zardari as saying: “Now there is a time to extend political reconciliation in the country.”

Information Minister Sherry Rehman, Senator Babar Awan, Faryal Talpur, Jehangir Badar, Attorney General Latif Khosa also attended the meeting.

Spokesman Farhatullah Babar said Mr Zardari had nothing to do with the decision of the apex court on the eligibility of the Sharif brothers.

Refuting an allegation levelled by Nawaz Sharif that President Zardari had offered him a ‘deal’ to keep the Punjab government, the spokesman said: “Those who know President Zardari cannot believe that he can give such an offer to Mian Sahib.”

Information Minister Sherry Rehman said the government had nothing to do with the court’s decision, saying: “We commisserate with Sharif brothers.”

“This is not what we would have sought according to our national reconciliation policy. We always offered them due share in government as per their mandate,” she added.

The PPP, she said, was a democratic party and did not believe in politics of victimisation.

Sherry Rehman alleged that the PML-N leadership had launched a vitriolic campaign against the PPP co-chairperson. “In politics, the differences are settled through negotiations rather than by levelling allegations against each other,” she said.

The minister said that the doors of PPP were open to PML-N leadership because the party believed in a negotiated settlement of all issues.

About the governor’s rule in Punjab, she said the province could not be left in vacuum without administration.

The minister said the PPP would not block the way of any political party to elect a chief minister of its choice in Punjab if it had the majority.

A press release issued by the President House said the governor’s rule was imposed on the ‘advice’ of the prime minister. However, the article under which it was enforced does not require consent of the prime minister.

Article 234 says: “If the President, on receipt of a report from the governor of a province or otherwise, is satisfied that a situation has arisen in which the government of the province cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, the President may, or if a resolution in this behalf is passed at a joint sitting shall, by proclamation, — power to issue proclamation in case of failure of constitutional machinery in a province. (a) assume to himself, or direct the governor of the province to assume on behalf of the President, all or any of the functions of the government of the province, and all or any of the powers vested in, or exercisable by, any body or authority in the province, other than the provincial assembly; (b) declare that the powers of the provincial assembly shall be exercisable by, or under the authority of, Majlis-i-Shoora (parliament); and (c) make such incidental and consequential provisions as appear to the President to be necessary or desirable for giving effect to the objects of the Proclamation, including provisions for suspending in whole or in part the operation of any provisions of the Constitution relating to any body or authority in the province:

Provided that nothing in this article shall authorise the President to assume to himself, or direct the governor of the province to assume on his behalf, any of the powers vested in, or exercisable by, a high court, or to suspend either in whole or in part the operation of any provisions of the Constitution relating to high courts.”