The Senate passed the 'dual office bill' on Monday amid opposition chants of 'no, no'. SM Zafar left the House dubbing the bill 'unnecessary and premature'.
Leaving the treasury members in utter astonishment, coupled with the sound of opposition desks thumping, the senator, who played a key role in striking a deal with the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal last year on LFO, walked out of the House prior to the voice vote on the bill.
Combined opposition staged two walkouts: one against the government for not allowing the Sharif family members to return and attend the funeral of Mohammad Sharif; and the second as a token of protest against the bill.
The piece of legislation will become an Act of Parliament after President General Pervez Musharraf gives his assent to it within a day or two.
Amid bedlam, the treasury hurriedly passed the bill to further amend the Code of civil Procedure-1908 (The Code of Civil Procedure Amendment Bill-2004 and the Defamation (Amendment) Bill-2004 and the bill to amend the Anti-Terrorism Act.
The opposition senators took strong exception to Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz statement about the construction of Kalabagh dam, saying the same had been endorsed by three provinces' assemblies through unanimous resolutions.
During the five-day debate, opposition senators delivered articulate speeches to justify their opposition to the bill while except Senator Mushahid Hussain Syed, no one from the treasury could make a mark in favour of the bill.
Ruling Senator and former law minister Khalid Ranjha during President Musharraf's three-year tenure, preferred not to participate in the debate while Senator SM Zafar dropped the 'bomb shell' after the Leader of House Wasim Sajjad wound up the debate.
"I stand by whatever I said and wrote about the government-MMA agreement last year," declared the ruling senator amid opposition's thumping of desks.
He called the passage of the bill as premature and un-necessary, saying it is beyond his understanding why the bill has been presented even before the President would have taken a decision about uniform.
Praising the President, he said that he (Musharraf) had that rare quality of changing the course of history, as Quaid-e-Azam did by creating Pakistan. "I think, he can do this by separating the office of the president and the army chief, " he contended.
The senator advised the opposition not to talk of agitation, saying with unity in their ranks, they could steer the country out of domestic challenges as well as the global crises.
Leader of the House Wasim Sajjad and Law Minister Wasi Zafar defended the bill and said that there was nothing wrong in President Musharraf continuing as president and the army chief for accomplishment of his seven-point agenda.
They asked the opposition to accord respect to the Parliament's piece of legislation (dual office bill) and shun opposition for the sake of opposition.
The minister said that in the past politicians had been inviting the military for a political role and the permanent solution to this situation was a power-sharing formula between the two. Later, the opposition senators shouted 'no', 'no, as the bill was read out clause-by-clause for a voice vote.
"It is a defining moment that the Parliament on its accord is abdicating its own powers. The bill tantamount to mutilating, violating and militarising the Constitution," said Raza Rabbani of PPPP.
The slot of the chief of army staff, he contended, was purely non-political and there was no provision in the Constitution, allowing him to interference in politics, give advice to the chief executive, summon the National Assembly, Senate or hold referendum.
If the rulers go by democracy and supremacy of assemblies in legislation, two assemblies of the smaller provinces have passed resolutions against the holding of dual office, he said. He alleged Musharraf used the military, judiciary, the local government institutions and civil bureaucracy to get 'legitimisation' and perpetuate his rule.
Another Senator of PPPP Safdar Abbasi dubbed General Musharraf becoming president through referendum as dacoity and alleged there was no precedence of this nature in any part of the world.
He said several countries were facing the challenges of terrorism and uprising, but no army chief had ever tried to capture power to face these challenges.
The senator charged Musharraf had de-shaped every state institution, be it the judiciary or the executive. Due to their appetite to rule, the military had lost its will to fight, he alleged.
MMA's Sahibzada Khalid Jan demanded of the military to safeguard the country's geographical boundaries instead of seeking share in power.
Referring to the president and prime minister's statement on Kalabagh Dam, he said that what was the significance of the bill if the rulers had no respect for the three provincial assemblies resolution against the controversial dam.
Senator Farhatullah Babar of the PPP said that the bill was actually to empower the army chief to become the President and not to empower the President to also wear military uniform. He said that he could see with mind's eye that another bill would be tabled soon empowering the Chairman Joint
Chiefs of staff Committee to become the Chairman Senate and the Vice Chief of Army staff to don the robes of Speaker National Assembly.
The senator pointed out that such a bill would read: "The holder of the office of Chairman Senate may, in addition to his office, hold the office of the Chairman JCSC, which is hereby declared not to disqualify its holder as provided under paragraph (d) of clause (1) of Article 63", similar to the bill to enable the President to hold another office.
"Hold on to your turbans" (pugree sambhal jatta, pugree sambhal way), he warned the Parliament members of the treasury benches.
Murad Shah of MMA cautioned against role of military in future politics, saying the 'dual office bill' might endanger democracy and even the Federation.
The bill is Musharraf-specific, undermining country's survival and against the spirit of democracy, said Lateef Ansari of PPPP.
"Holding of two offices by Musharraf is like slaughtering the Parliament and democracy. The bill, hence is uncalled for and in violation of the Constitution and the 17th Amendment," contended Hidayatullah Shah of MMA.
PPPP's Farooq Naik termed the bill as contrary to the Constitution, as it was an individual-specific and it would circumvent the Constitution. "The bill will turn an employer into an employee and vice-versa," he contended. He said it is a matter shame that the parliamentarians would be passing the laws against the constitution.
Comments
Comments are closed.