The news of intended resignations by MMA members of National Assembly has lent an element of inevitability to their colleagues' quitting the National Assembly, which may become a reality as soon as the House is called to meet early next month, analysts said.
They said hat it was just not possible that while four MMA members would resign in protest of the passage of the Women Protection Bill (WPB) and the rest, who too boycotted the proceedings, would keep their seats in the parliament. This would be considered 'betrayal' of the cause, which in the larger ideology-based constituency of the alliance could exact very heavy electoral price.
According to press reports, the number of the MNAs who have resigned has risen to four. These include Haroon-ur-Rashid, who had promised to quit as protest against Bajaur incident. His resignation has been accepted.
Others who have submitted their resignations are Hafiz Hussain Ahmad, Hanif Abbasi and Dr Farida Siddiqui. But the MMA would not resign from the Senate, which will be meeting from Tuesday, or provincial assemblies. This is an indication of giving the Musharraf-Shaukat-Shujaat government a running battle all along, till general elections.
The analysts also reject the oft-repeated official line that the vacuum created by resignations would be filled through by-elections, stressing that such a large scale exercise would be beyond the capacity of the election commission. The commission's task would be difficult all the more, given the fact that in a situation highly charged, as it would be, only some daredevil would risk standing for a seat in an assembly which, at best, would last one year.
They said some of the MMA components are as much connected with the Establishment as the ruling coalition, if not more. They said: "One should not forget that it is Jamaat-i-Islami, which is in the forefront of the forces that are bent upon resigning from National Assembly".
The analysts here also spurn the much-expressed official satisfaction over National Assembly's completion of four years of its tenure. Their argument is that the basic issue is not how long an assembly would lasts because the world over every parliament has its own life span.
"What really matters is that the assembly retains its representative character. Should it lose that quality, it should be dissolved," they said, reminding that the provision for snap elections is provided for in every constitution in a parliamentary democracy.
Comments
Comments are closed.