Pakistan’s Information Minister Attatullah Tarar doubled down on his stance to ban the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf while speaking on Pakistan-based Geo News’ program “Capital Talk” on July 23, Pakistan-based Geo News reported.
The Information Minister said that the ruling Government of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) will go ahead with the “principled” decision to ban Imran Khan’s party and it will be varied after relevant legal consultations, Geo News reported.
“[We] have consulted with the Pakistan Peoples Party with regards to the PTI ban and are currently in talks with the Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan […] people are strongly supporting [the idea of banning [PTI]”, Geo News stated, quoting Tarar.
The announcement came in the wake of Imran Khan’s acknowledgement to journalists at Adiala Jail that he had called for a protest outside the general headquarters if he was arrested, the Pakistan-based daily, Dawn reported.
Attatullah Tarar’s statement follows his remarks from last week about banning PTI. He had said that “PTI and Pakistan could not co-exist”, Geo News reported.
He said the decision was taken because of Imran Khan’s involvement in the May 9 riots and other PTI leaders’ attempts to sabotage an IMF deal.
“We have principally decided to ban PTI, but waiting for a broader consensus (among ruling allies) to impose the ban,” Dawn quoted Tarar as saying during an appearance on Geo News.
Earlier on Sunday, Imran Khan criticised the Government’s decision, saying that banning any political party amounts to “murder of democracy.”
“Our party was already banned, it was not allowed to contest the elections, and the chairman, vice chairman and president of the party were already in jail, they still say that the party is banned. It will be done,” Khan said.
Even the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) did not get on board with the Government decision while the other ally PML-Q also questioned the decision.
Civil society immediately raised objections, with the Human Rights Council of Pakistan expressing concern over the decision and calling it to be in violation of fundamental rights.
(with inputs from ANI)
Comments