- “No substantial outcome emerged in interactions,” says Gandapur.
- “Khan stands firmly by his ideology which cannot be imprisoned.”
- CM says PTI wouldn’t seek pardon for “someone else’s mistake”.
After Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan expressed willingness to hold talks with military, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur on Saturday confirmed that he had several interactions with the establishment but all remained inconclusive.
“No substantial outcome emerged in the interactions [with the establishment]”, said Gandapur after holding a meeting with the incarcerated former premier in Rawalpindi’s Adiala Jail.
Gandapur hinted at his multiple engagements with the establishment in his official capacity as KP chief minister.
He said: “I am holding an official position and I remain in contact with the establishment..interactions frequently take place but no solid outcome has emerged so far.”
His statement came after Imran, who has been imprisoned for nearly a year, offered to initiate “talks with the military” three days ago and asked the institution to nominate its representatives for negotiations.
The deposed prime minister, who ruled the country from 2018 to 2022 before being removed from office via no-confidence motion, reiterated his dialogue offer “within constitutional limits” once again during an interaction with journalists at Adiala Jail earlier today.
The KP CM further said that the PTI founder stood firmly on his ideology which he said cannot be “imprisoned”. Detailing his meeting with the ex-premier, he said that he found Khan concerned over the national economy and “ready to talks for the sake of the country besides constituting a dialogue committee”.
Ruling out confusions among the party ranks, the chief minister said that they are bound to follow the PTI founder’s decision. Gandapur also said that he would rather leave politics if he failed to announce and hold a public gathering in Islamabad.
The politico urged stakeholders to formulate terms of reference (ToRs) for holding negotiations to end political disputes to bring stability to the country.
The PTI firebrand politician also reiterated that his party doesn’t consider the incumbent government eligible for talks despite being offered to initiate negotiations on multiple occasions as “they are not the actual rulers”.
He, however, hoped for a “breakthrough” from his province just like it happened in the past.
The PTI founder’s move has drawn a strong response from the government which has accused Khan of trying to “politicise” the military and has also offered the party to come to the table.
When questioned about cases related to May 9, 2023, riots, Gandapur claimed that the PTI was not responsible for the violent protests and “whoever committed the mistake will have to accept it”.
He further said that the PTI was ready to apologise if it was found guilty of the crime, however, it would not seek pardon for “someone else’s mistake”.
The former ruling party’s founder and other senior leaders including former foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi and a large number of workers, have been embroiled in various cases related to the May 9 riots triggered after Imran’s arrest in a graft case last year.
The riots saw military installations including Rawalpindi’s General Headquarters (GHQ), Lahore’s Corps Commander’s House and others being vandalised by mobs which was followed by a nationwide crackdown against the PTI.
Regarding Sher Afzal Marwat, whose party membership was reportedly terminated but the decision exposed a division among the PTI leaders, Gandapur revealed that he was still in contact with the NA lawmaker.
“I advised Marwat to tolerate criticism, however, we will resolve internal matters within the party. I think that doors should not be permanently closed to anyone’s return,” said Gandapur, adding that he was unaware of any notification regarding the former’s termination.
To another question regarding a fierce tribal clash in Parachinar, the KP CM said that “ceasefire has been agreed between two warring groups who fought over a land dispute”. He said that the incident should not be termed as terrorism or religious dispute.