Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) lawmakers on Tuesday stormed the Punjab Assembly and clashed with the police as the controversy around a vote of confidence for Chief Minister Pervaiz Elahi continued, reported Aaj News.
The unrest came after Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah stated that Elahi and provincial Speaker Sibtain Khan had asked the police not to let opposition members enter the premises.
Establishment doesn’t appear to be neutral in Elahi’s vote of confidence: Imran Khan
The doors of the assembly were closed and security guards remained on high alert after there was a ruckus on Monday during which the opposition challenged the provincial chief minister to prove that he has the requisite numbers to win a vote of confidence.
On December 19, the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) had submitted a no-confidence motion against Elahi, two days after PTI Chairman Imran Khan announced that his governments in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa will dissolve their assemblies on December 23.
On Monday, former finance minister and PTI leader Asad Umar said that the party had the required numbers for Chief Minister Parvez Elahi’s vote of confidence, Aaj News reported.
“You all witnessed that the government proved its strength in today’s session of the Punjab Assembly. We will not require the opposition’s votes to prove our majority in the house,” Asad Umar said while speaking to media outside the provincial assembly.
His comments came amid reports that the PTI and the PML-Q had decided against holding the vote of confidence in Monday’s session, backtracking their earlier claims.
While Elahi was due to take the vote of confidence before January 11, the PTI decided last week against holding the vote of confidence of Punjab Chief Minister Pervaiz Elahi on January 9.
The vote of confidence was not on the agenda on Punjab assembly’s meeting scheduled for Monday.
Elahi had also previously refused to take the vote, stating that Punjab governor Muhammad Baligh Ur Rehman orders regarding it are unconstitutional.
Imran has said that the date for the vote should depend on the court’s orders.