PTI talks hit deadlock over govt ‘stubbornness’

PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Khan has said that negotiations with the government failed to reach a final agreement because of what he described as the government’s “stubbornness”, while insisting that the party’s long march would continue.

Speaking to the media in Swat, Gohar said the PTI had made sincere efforts to reach an understanding with the government, but the authorities had not shown willingness to agree to the party’s key demands.

“There is nothing that cannot be resolved. Our demands are simple,” he said, calling for a meeting with PTI founder Imran Khan and his family. He questioned why Imran Khan’s family members had been kept in Kot Lakhpat Jail.

Gohar said the PTI was neither withdrawing from the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government nor planning to dissolve the provincial assembly. He warned that PTI senators, members of the National Assembly and provincial assembly could be forced to boycott proceedings if what he called unconstitutional measures were taken.

The PTI chairman said the government had conveyed the impression that it was ready to engage in negotiations in good faith. However, he claimed that the government did not agree to even one of the party’s proposals.

He said the PTI had demanded a meeting between the prime minister and the opposition leader as part of the dialogue process. The party had also sought a joint strategy against terrorism, involving the federal government and all four provinces.

According to Gohar, a unified narrative against terrorism was necessary in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan, Sindh and Punjab. He questioned how peace could be restored if chief secretaries and police chiefs received instructions from authorities outside their respective provinces.

He also criticised the imposition of Section 144 in the province, saying that deputy commissioners were allegedly taking such decisions on the instructions of others.

Gohar accused the federal government of interfering in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa affairs and demanded an end to such intervention. He claimed that the province was effectively under “governor’s rule” without a formal declaration.

He said five key points had been discussed during negotiations, but the government had failed to demonstrate seriousness. However, he maintained that there was still time for the government to return to the negotiating table.