Will Imran Khan back down from his unconstitutional demands?
For more than a year Nawaz Sharif declined to take notice of Imran Khan’s demand for recounting of votes in four National Assembly constituencies, delayed the formation of the committee for electoral reforms and generally ignored the Parliament despite repeated reminders by the opposition MPs. The march on Islamabad is the outcome of the negligence. Had the prime minister requested the Supreme Court to announce a commission to investigate PTI’s allegations regarding rigging in the May 2013 elections soon after Khan demanded it, there might not have been any need for the march.
That said, it is time Imran Khan too got down his high horse. The PTI chief had originally put up two demands. First, a probe into the alleged large scale rigging in the elections; second, electoral reforms and a new Election Commission. Besides agreeing to a judicial enquiry at the highest level, Nawaz Sharif has also been instrumental in the formation of a parliamentary committee for electoral reforms which will complete its task in three months. He has promised that the government would also go for constitutional amendments if these were required.
There is no justification whatsoever for a sit-in after the conclusion of the Azadi march. The way Khan has rejected Sharif’s offer for an enquiry he had himself demanded has created a perception that the PTI chief wants to put the system at stake purely for personal motives. To maintain that an SC which sent home two elected PMs cannot hold an independent enquiry as long as Nawaz Sharif is the chief executive is frivolous. What is more it amounts to questioning the integrity of the judges of the apex court.
There is no legal or constitutional justification for seeking the resignation of the prime minister on the basis of unproved accusations. Imran Khan has made his point by holding the protest march. He should now cancel the sit-in, seek the redressal of his grievances through Supreme Court and let the parliamentary committee formulate electoral reforms.
Comments are closed.