PTI seeks disqualification of Senator Saifullah Abro for voting in favour of 27th Amendment

PTI seeks disqualification of Senator Saifullah Abro for voting in favour of 27th Amendment

The PTI submitted a reference to the Senate chairperson on Thursday, seeking the disqualification of Senator Saifullah Abro for defecting from the party line and voting in favour of the 27th Constitutional Amendment.

PTI Senator Ali Zafar posted about the development on his X account, saying: “Saifullah Abro went against the party line by voting in favour of the 27th Constitutional Amendment, for which a reference for his disqualification has been filed.”

The reference, moved by Zafar, invoked Article 63-A of the Constitution, which deals with disqualification on grounds of defection.

“In terms of Article 63-A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, I in my capacity as the parliamentary leader of Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf in the Senate/ party head hereby submit this declaration that Senator Saifullah Abro has defected from the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI).

“The declaration is being submitted for onward reference to the chief election commissioner for laying the same before the election commission in accordance with the said Article 63-A,” the reference, dated January 1 and seen by Dawn, said.

It added that a meeting of the PTI was convened prior to voting on the 27th Amendment, in which it was “explicitly decided and communicated to all PTI senators in writing” that they were to oppose and not vote in favour of any legislative measure or bill relating to the said amendment.

The direction to oppose and not vote in favour of any legislative measure relating to the 27th Amendment was also issued by Zafar to all PTI senators, including Abro, the reference stated, adding: “The record confirms that this direction was properly conveyed to him and that he was fully aware of it.”

The direction was also widely published in the media, the reference mentioned.

However, Senator Abro voted in favour on the legislation first on November 10 — when the Senate first voted on the amendment — and then on November 13, when the house considered the legislation for the second time after some changes were made to it.

At both instances, the reference said, Abro voted in favour if the amendment, contrary to the “clear, unanimous and duly communicated direction” of the PTI and his parliamentary leader in the Senate.

The reference further stated that a show-cause notice dated December 2 was issued to Abro, and it was subsequently “received at his residential/ official mailing addresses of Larkana and Islamabad, affording him full and adequate opportunity to show cause as to why a declaration may not be made against him in terms of Article 63-A”.

The show-cause was notice was issued in compliance with the requirements of Article 63-A, the reference said, further stating that “despite the lapsed time, no reply or explanation was received from Senator Saifullah Abro”.

By voting against the direction issued by the PTI, Abro “committed a deliberate and wilful breach of party discipline“, the reference said.

“This squarely attracts the provisions of Article 63-A of the Constitution, which stipulates that if a member of a parliamentary party composed of a single political party in a house votes contrary to any direction issued by the parliamentary party, in relation to a constitution (amendment) bill, he may be declared in writing by the party head to have defected from the political party.”

The reference stated that after due consideration of facts, the PTI, as well as its parliamentary leaders in the Senate, had “concluded that the conduct of Senator Saifullah Abro [of] casting a vote in favour of the 27th Constitutional Amendment on November 10 and November 15 [sic], contrary to the direction issued by the PTI parliamentary party constitutes defection from the PTI”.

“Senator Saifullah Abro is, therefore, declared to have defected from the PTI in terms of Article 63-A.”

The PTI requested the Senate chairperson to refer this declaration to the chief election commissioner “for laying it before the election commission for [a] decision in terms of Article 63-A”.

More to follow

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *