ISLAMABAD: Whether or not the opposition was speechless and clueless after Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s elaborate address, its overall attitude was quite bizarre because it frittered away a good opportunity to hammer that its questions had not been answered by him in his long-awaited speech to the National Assembly.
It was on the opposition parties’ relentless insistence that the premier came to the Lower House of Parliament to speak on the offshore companies of his children. And when he delivered a comprehensive narrative, the opposition thought it proper to just go away.
Its top leading lights had announced for umpteen times that they would not let Nawaz Sharif off the hook when he would turn up in the National Assembly. But unfortunately they were found wanting for reasons they could only spell out.
It appeared that leader of opposition Khurshid Shah was caught unawares and was not prepared to give his rejoinder otherwise there was no reason and justification of his assertion that he would not speak. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan also could not deliver his usual hard-hitting speech due to the protest. It also seemed that as if the opposition parties had decided in their pre-session consultations that they, in any case, would walk out regardless of the quality, substance and information provided by Nawaz Sharif in his address. It was obviously a negative approach.
The parliament is the real place for the MPs to resolve even most complex issues, and the instant matter was the fit site for them to go to its bottom. The opposition was needed to fire pertinent questions about the prime minister’s offshore companies. This opportunity was lost without any credible reason.
The opposition’s freakish approach apart, it was a memorable sight to see Imran Khan standing behind Khurshid Shah during their subsequent chat with the reporters. The PTI chief had repeatedly dubbed him as the “PA” (personal assistance) of the premier during his prolonged sit-in.
Apart from the watchers of the parliamentary scenario, every one desired and expected that the opposition would follow the time-tested traditions of subjecting the Leader of the House to grilling regarding his speech.
Particularly, when Nawaz Sharif categorically said that not a single penny was remitted from Pakistan to establish the Jeddah Steel and buy the London flats, the opposition was required to confront then and there him on the basis of hard facts if they had any.
It would have been prudent had the opposition leaders stated inside the National Assembly in front of the prime minister whatever they said after the walkout. Obviously, the sanctity of the words spoken on the floor of the parliament is much more than something uttered elsewhere. The opposition’s strategy (not unusual in this part of the world) was incomprehensible except that it was meant to undermine the directly elected legislature as well as democracy. In this process, they hurt the system of which it is part.
Valid questions may have been raised about the prime minister’s remarks. Only those who have proofs to rebut them could do so. The opposition lacked this capacity and ability otherwise it would have stayed in the National Assembly. What was the reason behind demanding of the prime minister to speak for which they had been insisting for several days if they were not going to react to it?
As far as Nawaz Sharif’s speech was concerned, he, in his own way, ended the debate on the much talked aboutmoney trail leading to the purchase of the London flats by saying that no funds were sent from Pakistan and all the money that was used to buy this real estate was generated abroad.
However, he was fully prepared to explain his position before the judicial commission after a consensus would be reached between the government and opposition on its Terms of Reference and law that would govern its proceedings. He was upfront to suggest to the National Assembly Speaker to form a committee in order to devise an all-inclusive mechanism for accountability so that the practice of hurling unsubstantiated allegations was dispensed with. In this connection, he recalled the long forgotten Charter of Democracy he had signed with Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Chairperson Benazir Bhutto in London about a decade ago.
The prime minister also handed over certain documents relating to the taxes he has paid over several years in a bid to refute the propaganda that he has not been paying substantial taxes. This was also a good material for the opposition to raise more questions.