The Federal Minister for Information and Law stated on Friday that voting on the no-trust motion against Prime Minister Imran Khan could be postponed until next week.
In a landmark decision a day earlier, the Supreme Court of Pakistan directed National Assembly Speaker Asad Qasier to convene the session on Saturday (April 9) at 10:30 a.m. to allow a vote on the no-confidence motion against the prime minister.
The Supreme Court of Pakistan also declared the government’s decision to dissolve the National Assembly and NA Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri’s ruling null and void and contrary to the Constitution.
Contrary to the Supreme Court’s orders, Fawad said the vote on the no-trust motion against the Prime Minister could be postponed until next week rather than today.
“We will not take much time, but the foreign secretary will brief the house on the threat letter before discussing a vote of no confidence,” Fawad said.
Despite the court’s orders, the PTI-led government has decided not to hold a vote on a no-confidence motion today, according to sources.
They went on to say that PTI members of Parliament have been told to hold “long debates during the NA session” so that voting can be “avoided due to a lack of time.”
The National Assembly secretariat, on the other hand, has urged members to vote on the no-trust motion against Prime Minister Imran Khan today, or the speaker will be charged with contempt of court.
The vote on the no-confidence motion is listed as the fourth item on the NA’s six-point agenda, which was released on Friday.
The PTI’s political committee has proposed mass resignations
The ruling PTI’s political committee had suggested a day earlier that the party should hand down en masse resignations from the legislatures in the Centre, Punjab, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, according to sources close to the situation.
The suggestion was made during a meeting of the PTI’s political committee, which was presided over by Prime Minister Imran Khan.
According to sources, the meeting discussed the country’s current political situation and held consultations on whether to make the alleged foreign plot in the “threat letter” public.
According to sources, committee members made recommendations on the matter in light of the Secrets Act and judicial orders.
The committee proposed making the “threat letter” public, arguing that because there is public pressure, a decision should be made after careful consideration.
