LAHORE, June 17: A leader of the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal told Punjab Assembly Speaker Afzal Sahi that opposition legislators respected him and that some other people were bent on tarnishing his image.

Though Arshad Baggu did not name the elements out to bring a bad name to the speaker, he was obviously referring to the ruling party which is showering praise on him for taking action against opposition legislators.

The MMA leader also told the speaker that the house had become a laughing stock on account of the “business” transacted on Thursday, an allusion to the suspension of a couple of opposition MPAs for two weeks.

Going further down the same course, he praised the speaker for the excellent way in which he had run the house during the past 30 months, and then urged him to show magnanimity and review his decision regarding the lawmakers ordered out.

It was a good conciliatory move that was immediately foiled by others present in the house. Some opposition leaders rose from their seats and started shouting. Mushtaq Kiani, a minister, retaliated. The situation was aggravated within no time. A crisis then snowballed as the house echoed with “Go speaker, go” slogans.

The respect the MMA leader claimed the opposition had for the speaker was nowhere to be seen. Male and female legislators raised several other slogans against repression and the use of force.

The opposition’s anger grew when during the noisy scene the speaker expelled another seven MPs from the house for two weeks. After about half an hour, opposition lawmakers who were demanding the speaker leave the house walked out.

Treasury benches celebrated the tension between the speaker and the opposition. Some faces glowed as the speaker announced that he would not be bothered even if not a single opposition member attended the proceedings.

The situation is expected to worsen on Saturday (today) as PPP’s Rana Aftab has announced that all opposition lawmakers expelled by the speaker would be brought to the house, notwithstanding the likely consequences. The speaker, on his part, is determined not to let any one in.

It is expected that Chief Minister Pervaiz Elahi’s backing of the speaker’s move will further encourage the latter’s sworn inflexibility in the matter.

Soon after the opposition MPAs left the house, the treasury started cursing the protesters and praising the speaker for his firmness. Desks were thumped many a time when a woman MPA said the expulsion decision should have been taken two-and-a-half years ago (when the assembly had come into being).

The speaker also availed of the opportunity to defend the favour he had done the opposition legislators by expelling them from the house. He argued that the ruling party had 261 MPs who could show a serious reaction against those using abusive language against the ruling party.

Maybe he is right in his assertion. Because everyone knows blows and fists decide what the law can’t, if and when it should come to that.

Who is the gainer or the loser in the whole situation? It’s difficult to answer the first part of the question. But the obvious losers are indeed the taxpayers, and the nation as a whole.

It is because of such an attitude of legislators on both sides of the political divide that the democratic system has not taken root, and assemblies have not been able to settle very basic issues.

A point raised by PPP’s Rana Aftab will explain the situation.

On a point of order, he said the members expelled from the house could not be barred from entering the assembly premises. In his opinion, the ‘house’ means the hall where legislative business is carried out by elected representatives. The remaining portions of the assembly building, he argued, could not be taken as part of the house.

He told Mr Sahi that the speaker’s chamber or the opposition leader’s chamber were not part of the house, implying that there was no bar on the expelled leaders from visiting those offices.

The speaker reserved his ruling on the point.

To many it is simply unfortunate that the Punjab Assembly speaker will give a ruling on the definition of the house more than five decades after independence. Had the assemblies been allowed to work uninterruptedly and legislators had performed their duties properly, we would have settled such issues long ago. Will common citizens be wrong if they were to say ‘plague on both houses’ after seeing the performance of their elected representatives.