Imran says NSC meeting called to use 'security' as pretext to postpone elections

Former prime minister and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan said on Thursday it is clear that the Pakistan Democratic Movement-led federal government wants to get out of elections in any way possible, adding that the decision to call the National Security Committee meeting tomorrow is an attempt to use "security as a pretext" for the postponement of elections.

In a Twitter post, Imran said: "This will pit armed forces directly against not just judiciary but also the nation."

The former premier said that the government brought in an unconstitutional bill on Supreme Court and a National Assembly resolution against Judiciary to put off elections.

The statement comes hours after The NA passed a resolution rejecting the decision of the Supreme Court in the Punjab elections to delay the case.

The resolution, which also urged the prime minister not to abide by the ruling, was moved by Balochistan Awami Party legislator Khalid Magsi.

“This house rejects the minority decision of the three-member bench and binds the prime minister and the cabinet not to implement the unconstitutional and unlawful decision,” Magsi said.

The resolution stated that the house considers the conduct of general elections simultaneously across the country as the solution to all the problems.

It also said the house was concerned about “interference in political matters” and that the judgments of the “minority” are creating anarchy in the country and paving the way for division in the federating units.

In its verdict on Tuesday, a three-judge bench declared the ECP’s order unconstitutional and ordered elections in Punjab be held on May 14.

The apex court directed the caretaker government in Punjab to assist the ECP with elections and said the federal government has been asked to help with this, ordering authorities to release Rs21 billion to the ECP by April 10.

Meanwhile, the federal cabinet had also rejected the SC’s verdict, and declared that the decision was not “actionable.”