Government Decided to Protest the Oppositions Azadi March Protest

On Wednesday, the government decided to protest the opposition's Azadi March protest, unless the parameters presented by the legal protest court were violated. The decision was made after the commissioned team for negotiations with the opposition party made recommendations to the prime minister.

During the meeting

It was decided that "Azadi March, proposed with a firm belief that the government supports democratic ideology, occurs within the courts and constitutions, will be interpreted according to the decision of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. "Islamabad High Court. The Prime Minister believes in democratic rights to protest," Congressman spokesman told us earlier.

Protesters can carry out the march, as long as they have no negative impact on the daily lives of citizens, according to past rulings of the Supreme Court and the High Court. The news reports that Islamabad police issued riot gear and mobilized containers to block sensitive areas of the capital to prevent protesters from advancing to the Red Zone.

Government, opposition on Friday

On Wednesday, Defense Minister Pervez Katak and House of Representatives Punjab Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi contacted Akram Khan Durrani and Maulana Fazlur Rehman of Jud-F, members of the government negotiation committee, respectively about the protest march. According to a JUI-F spokesman, following a telephone call from government representatives, Durrani convened a meeting of the opposition Rehbar committee on Friday.

It takes place at 4 pm in the Islamabad residence of Durani. After the meeting, the government negotiation committee, led by Khattak, will meet with the Rehbar Committee at 5 pm to discuss Azadi March.

Azadi March

Leiman Governor of JUI-F announced in June that his party decided to make an anti-government long march to Islamabad for a month in October to overthrow the government. Maulana initially set October 27 as the date of the long march, but later said that he would organize a rally on October 27 to postpone solidarity with the Kashmir people by postponing until October 27.

The world about the atrocities of India that occupied Kashmir that day. On Friday, Prime Minister Imran Khan formed seven teams under Defense Minister Pervez Katak to engage JUI-F and other opposition parties ahead of the planned march.

Secretary-General JUI-F met with the secretary of the party and Senator Maulana Abdul Ghafoor Haideri on Saturday to meet with the Senate chairman who reached the meeting by telephone as a member of the government commerce team. .

On Sunday after the PPP disputed the negotiations, Rehman blocked his party's delegation from meeting with Sanjrani that the decision on dialogue with the government would be decided by the opposition Rehbar committee.

JUI-F leader Akram Durrani told the media on Monday that after the Rehbar committee meeting, the option to negotiate with the government is authorized to take a peaceful 'Aza di March' on October 27.

The occupied Kashmir in India

The occupied Kashmir (IOK) in India is facing a "humanitarian crisis," and the United States Congress panel observed that India's decision on the 5th of August to merge "territorial" territory was "disaster" for Kasmiris. The report was held Tuesday in a full-day hearing at the House Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, and the Indian media described it as "the most important investigation that India has received from the US Congressional Panel since the 1998 nuclear test.

At least three lawmakers, Ilhan Omar, Tom Malinowski and David Cicilline, testified to US officials in front of a panel recently that the Indian government's motivation for Kashmir's decision was a national security or transnationalism and a major agenda. Rhode Island Democratic Congressman Siclin asked.

How far have you been able to accomplish this attack and this attack in Kashmir as a result of BJP and RSS, especially RSS, especially transnational sentiment?" "What are we doing to help it fight and recognize that this is not the proper way to act in democracy?

The BJP political platform

The repeal of Article 370 has long been the mainstream of the BJP political platform. When Modi took the majority in the general election, 67% of the Indians participated in the government to move it quickly and without consultation with us. ” G Wells replied. Withdrawal is a bit of a whisker. We are not taking the position of Article 370 and we are taking a position on whether Kasmisris can live with dignity and have a complete economic and political life.

Congressman Cicilline asked if the Indian security forces had used pellet guns in Kashmiris since August 5, the children who were blinded by these guns, and did not know where their families were. Wells promised to look into this report. Brad Sherman, chairman of the committee, claimed to have blocked Kashmir in other parts of the world to prevent cross-border terrorist attacks.

Sherman asked if there had been a "confirmed cross-border terrorism" incident after changing the status of Kashmir occupied by India since August 5. Wells said she was "hearing different stories on different sides," but "we observed a decrease in infiltration incidents. This observation contradicts India's claim that there were terrorist groups waiting to cross the line of control.

Parliament Chairman Kaulacus Parliament

Pakistan's parliamentary chairman Sheila Jackson Lee, asked Secretary of State Robert Distro if Locke Destro could explain the "humanitarian crisis. Jackson Lee, a member of India's Prime Minister in Houston earlier this month and attending India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi, called for Pakistan's sacrifice in the war on terror. She approached humanitarian crisis from a different angle.

Have you ever rejected the famous Indian government or journalist from the Indian government for the United States? No," Wells responded, leaving room for Jackson Lee's follow-up questions. What should I do if I am denied entry to the Kashmir region for lawful purposes (a member of the US Congress)? I am sorry that our senator Van Hollen could not travel to Kashmir.

Wells is convinced that we can travel back to Kashmir. In a two-hour long morning session, Trump administration officials often had to defend India's actions in Kashmir, expressing "inconvenience for the choices chosen by New Delhi," according to Indian media reports.

The hearing title is 'South Asian Human Rights', but there are numerous questions related to Kashmir. The packed room was applauded whenever a lawmaker or US official criticized Indian actions in Kashmir.

Well stressed her concerns about the way the Indian authorities implemented the decision on August 5, pointing out that Washington is constantly raising concerns about the Kashmir situation.

She also said that

While the United States supports Kasmiris' right to protest peacefully, it denounces "terrorists trying to disrupt dialogue using violence and fear" between India and Pakistan. Mrs. Wells said US diplomats rely on Indian officials and media reports for information about Kashmir's situation, Sherman said.

Mrs. Wells said David Torne of Congress "looks like the right time" when he argued that India is not the right time to bring foreign officials and journalists into Kashmir. Congressman Abigail Spanberger said, “How do you accept that India, a US strategic partner from trade to military cooperation, is currently saying that US diplomats cannot enter Kashmir?

She said Indian government officials said that the situation in Kashmir has improved, but her members of Kashmir's family said "very different stories." She also cited several examples of how the blockade disrupted life and even led to death.

Senator Tom Malinovsky pointed out that this interception "dissolves the very people who want to be our allies. The first Indian-American lawmaker, Pramila Jayapal and Sherman, said that the Kashmiri-American Mujahid Shah was detained regardless of his father, businessman, or political party.

Jaya Pal was concerned that despite orders from the High Court to stop preventive detention, India did not disclose even those who had a favorable ruling.
Previous Post
Next Post

0 comments: