Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah Khan Saturday said for the last several years, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chief Imran Khan had been training “terrorists” who actually took part in arson and vandalism of May 9 after his arrest.
Addressing a news conference, he said the goons of Imran Khan burnt houses and defence installations on directives of Imran Khan who had instructed them to create violence and spread chaos and anarchy as soon as he was arrested.
The minister said Imran Khan told his goons beforehand on how to react to his arrest. It was not the nation’s reaction, instead that was reaction of a group who got trainings and instructions from Imran Khan.
The minister said, during the three days, only 40,000 to 45,000 people had participated in the protest against the arrest of Imran Khan across the country.
Sharing the numbers of the protesters, he said, protests were staged at 12 spots in Islamabad on May 9, during which 650 to 700 people participated. Moreover, he added, during protests staged at 221 spots in Punjab on May 9, 15,000 to 18,000 people participated.
In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, he said, protests were staged at 126 spots in which only 19,000-22,000 people participated. On the second day of protests, 1,900 participated in demonstrations in Islamabad, 2,200 in Punjab and 13,000 in KP, he added.
Sharing the numbers for the third day protests, he said 515 people participated in Islamabad, 5,000-6,000 in KP and 800-1,000 in Punjab.
He said that violets protesters were involved in the looting of shops and residences.
The minister vowed that the “the gangs produced by PTI chief Imran Khan ” would never be given forgiveness. “They will be identified through CCTV cameras and will not be allowed to go scot-free.”
Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah reiterated the stance of PML-N which took exception to a relief given to Imran Khan by the courts, saying that no one else was given such relief in Pakistan’s judicial and constitutional history.
“After that, how can high courts and district courts dare to do anything then,” he said, adding that Imran was given whatever he asked for. He said that the Islamabad High Court had given blanket relief to Imran Khan.
The minister said that from day one it was the stance of political parties that Imran Khan is not a political leader instead he was a “Finta”.
He alleged that the prime objective of Imran Khan was to create unrest and chose in the country.
Interior Minister said that Imran Khan should be removed from politics through votes, otherwise he would put the country in danger.
Rana said that it was not the culture of the political parties to set defence installations on fire and attacked the house of political opponents.
The minister said that in the past, despite the political differences no political parties attacked each-other homes.
“Specific culture of attacking political opponents had been injected by Imran Khan in the country politics” he added.
Rana Sanaullah claimed Imran’s objective was to “spread anarchy and chaos” in the country and his entire struggle was directed towards achieving this purpose. “Since 2014, he has created a cult,” the minister added.
The minister questioned how political workers can stop the ambulance and attack the patients. “Can political workers set schools and Radio buildings on fire?” he asked.
Rana said that the animal market was first looted by the PTI miscreants and after that they set it also on fire.
The minister said that documented evidences were available of Rs. 60 billion in corruption committed by Imran Khan.
The minister said, that Imran Khan and his wife were trustees of Al-Qadir Trust and both were accused of corruption of Rs. 60 billion and Imran Khan would have to answer.
The Minister said that NAB sent a call of notices to Imran Khan after investigating a corruption case of Rs 60 billion. “Being an office holder, he has to answer for Rs. 60 billion corruption in an open and shut case,” he added.
“Staging a protest was a political and democratic right of the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM), and accordingly, the political parties would present their point of view outside the Supreme Court premises,” he added.
