PTI leader Fawad Chaudhry on Monday rejected again elected Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif call explore content of telegram allegedly containing details of threat made United States against former Prime Minister Imran Khan government.
According to Khan, the cable he first said of and waved public rally on March 27, details of ambassador’s meeting with Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Donald Lu in with which the latter allegedly threatened Pakistan. Khan and his party tied the perceived threat with mistrust move against his in National Assembly, which led to his overthrow from the top office.
majid, in In the cable, Lu reportedly warned that Han’s continuation as prime minister would have consequences for bilateral relations. The US, Khan claims, was annoyed with his “independent foreign policyand a trip to Moscow.
After his successful election to office prime minister earlier today, Shahbaz announced that he will take action for en in-camera briefing of parliamentary committee on National security to discuss and determine the authenticity of cable and session will attend military leadership, Inter-Services Intelligence director generalforeign secretary and ambassador who sent a letter.
Responding to prime minister’s proposal, Chaudhry denounced it as an “ugly attempt” on the part of new The prime minister offered himself a deal like the National Reconciliation Ordinance and said PTI had rejected it.
He said that the Supreme Court should form an independent commission to investigate the case, with bodyx probe head being human who No one could object.
Earlier today, the Islamabad High Court denied a motion to investigate the content of of cable. It said that the creation of a telegram sent by a Pakistani diplomat was “controversial and subject of litigation” was against in public and the interests of the state.
The court noted in his order that it was “established law” concerning the country’s foreign affairs. affairs were “extremely sensitive and therefore not subject to prosecution”. It stated that the allegations were “vague” and is not supported by any credible material which deserves to be made the subject of a diplomatic cable of trial.
.
