Appreciable response by PML (N), PPP

WITH the passage of time, all stakeholders are showing maturity to ensure that the political system runs and delivers. In this backdrop, people have lauded decision of former ruling party PML (N) and PPP that they would not boycott the oath-taking session of the National Assembly and instead sit in Parliament and play their parliamentary role as opposition.
The decision shows our political parties are mature and they know the risks involved in boycotting newly created assemblies. The two parties have been complaining of rigging in the general election and at a combined meeting of the opposition parties in Islamabad it was decided that they would not take oath as members of the assemblies. However, PML (N) had sought time to have internal discussions and consultations with other political parties and after their meeting in the Capital both PPP and PML (N) opted to stay within Parliament. They have also decided to give tough time to the government, which is democratic right of the Opposition. A strong opposition would ensure that the government remains on track and delivers as per its manifesto and commitments made before and during electioneering.
The broad-based understanding between the two major opposition parties augurs well for the democratic process and hopefully they would also make every effort to take other parties like MMA and ANP along. The parties might have legitimate or perceived grievances but they should not indulge in any agitation beyond a certain point at this stage. They are, of course, fully entitled to agitate but they must remain within the bounds of democratic norms and decency. The Constitution and the law provide clear mechanism for redressal of grievances including those relating to rigging and complaints should be directed to the forums as envisaged in the law. Already, some results have changed due to recounting and legal course could also deliver justice to others who have similar complaints. There is, however, dire need to ensure that the tribunal meant to hear election-related petitions dispose them of within the timeframe mentioned in the law and there should not be unnecessary delay in their disposal.

Share this post

    scroll to top