ISLAMABAD: Tehreek Tahaffuz-e-Ayeen Pakistan (TTAP) – the major opposition alliance – on Tuesday boycotted the in-camera briefing of Parliamentary Committee on National Security, saying any meeting without Imran Khan – the incarcerated ex-prime minister – is meaningless.
Speaking at a joint press conference, TTAP Chairman Mahmood Khan Achakzai flanked by PTI Secretary General Salman Akram Raja, the opposition leader in National Assembly Omar Ayub, Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) Chief Sahibzada Hamid Raza, Allama Nasir Abbas of Majlis-e-Wahdatul Muslimeen (MWM), and others, said that the opposition would not attend the committee meeting as such meetings have no importance if ex-prime minister Imr1an Khan is not included.
Achakzai, who is also the chief of Pashtunkhwa Milli Awami Party (PkMAP), said that representatives from every political party should be invited to any meeting on national security.
“Pakistan’s dire circumstances needed a joint session of parliament, in which, everyone should have a chance to speak,” he added.
He further claimed that the superintendent of Rawalpindi’s Adiala Jail, where Imran is incarcerated, does not allow PTI leaders or other MNAs to meet the ex-prime minister. “If no one is allowed to meet him, it should be announced that Imran Khan is a dangerous man who is not allowed to meet anyone,” he quipped.
Achakzai questioned the legitimacy of the meeting, stating that an unconstitutional prime minister – Shehbaz Sharif – had no legitimacy to summon such a session.
“If we go to this meeting, they will later say that so and so were in disagreement,” he added, apparently referring to government leaders highlighting rifts within the opposition. Salman Akram Raja announced, “No representative from PTI will attend the meeting,” and said Ali Amin Gandapur would attend the high-level gathering as the KP chief minister.
Doubling down on his party’s stance, Raja said, “We demand that Imran Khan be released on parole if they think the moot is that important as Imran Khan is the only leaders who can unite the whole nation.” He stated that the PTI has refused to participate in the meeting, adding that the decision was made at a meeting of the party’s political committee late Tuesday night.
He reiterated that the PTI is not in favour of any military operation at this time, adding that the people of Balochistan have been suffering due to these operations for the last 77 years and we are not in favour of this. “We have to fix this country and end fascism […] military operations is no solution to the problem,” he maintained.
Allama Raja Nasir Abbas and Sahibzada Hamid Raza echoed similar concerns, demanding that Imran Khan be included in key security discussions.
They said that holding such meetings without taking Imran Khan onboard would be an exercise in futility as he is the only leader who can steer the country out of the prevalent crisis.
Omar Ayub criticised the short notice for the security meeting while highlighting that the PTI leaders were denied access to Imran Khan despite court orders.
Earlier, other opposition parties including PkMAP, SIC, MWM, and Balochistan National Party-Mengal (BNP-M) had announced a boycott of the Parliamentary National Security Committee meeting. Initially, the PTI had decided to attend the meeting, with spokesperson Sheikh WaqqasAkram saying his party would give its input in the meeting. The NA opposition leader had also termed the consultation as crucial to aligning PTI’s position effectively on matters of national significance.
Reacting to the PTI’s decision not to attend the security meeting, Defence Minister Khawaja Asif said the party was “doing politics of its interest.” “The PTI has proved today that Imran Khan is their first and last priority and that the country’s well-being and peace does not hold importance for them,” Asif said in a post on X.
In the afternoon, PTI Chairman Gohar Ali Khan held a meeting with Imran Khan in Adiala Jail, and said that Khan fully endorsed PTI political committee’s decision not to attend the committee meeting.
When questioned about PTI’s last-minute decision to skip the meeting after initially agreeing to participate, he attributed it to the party’s collective decision-making process. He declined to assess whether the party’s choice to abstain was timely or suitable, explaining that as the chairman of PTI, he refrains from making personal evaluations and would not comment on the party’s stance.
He said that national security should not be politicised and that all political parties should have a unified stance on combating terrorism.
He refused to comment on whether the party’s decision to abstain was timely and appropriate, stating that as PTI chairman, he cannot make personal judgements and would not comment on the party’s decision.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Comments