Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam Fazl (JUI-F) leader, Fazlur Rehman, sought to rectify his recent statements concerning the involvement of former Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) chief Lt Gen (retd) Faiz Hameed in the no-confidence vote against former Prime Minister Imran Khan and the PTI government. In an interview on GTV’s program “G for Gharidah,” Fazl acknowledged that he had mistakenly mentioned Gen Faiz’s name in connection with the incident. He clarified that Gen Faiz was not involved, stating unequivocally, “there is no doubt.”
Attributing the alleged rigging in the 2018 general elections to the former generals and their regime, Fazl emphasized the need to relegate such matters to history rather than engaging in prolonged debate. He asserted that when political, economic, and defense instability arose during the PTI government, the two generals began seeking ways to stabilize the situation by engaging with politicians.
Expressing his discontent with the military’s historical involvement in politics, Fazl called for an end to such practices. Responding to challenges to make allegations under oath, he criticized the military’s own disregard for their oaths, particularly regarding non-interference in politics.
Showed skepticism about existing system:Â several key things about Imran Ouster
Regarding calls for an investigation into the matter, Fazl questioned the credibility of existing institutions and suggested skepticism about the effectiveness of a truth and reconciliation commission in the current climate.
More to read:Â JUI-F sides with PTI, rejects general election result
Expounding on his claims of military interference in political matters, Fazl recalled a meeting on March 26, 2022, where opposition parties were allegedly offered the option for Prime Minister Imran Khan’s resignation in exchange for dropping the no-confidence motion against him.
Addressing inquiries about his purported meetings with retired Gen Bajwa and other military officials regarding the no-confidence move, Fazl admitted to several private discussions but did not provide further details.