QUETTA - Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari on Tuesday said he had no involvement in the political developments happening in Islamabad but emphasised that everyone must follow the Constitution.
Speaking at an event organized by the Balochistan Bar Association, Bilawal declared that a Constitutional Court will be established at all costs, warning that failure to do so would have damaging consequences.
He said, “Those who do not accept the Constitution should leave politics and law.”
Bilawal, during his address, criticised the current power dynamics in Pakistan, stating that while Parliament drafted the Constitution, governance was controlled by others.
He questioned, “Do you want decisions to continue while we remain silent?” The PPP Chairman further expressed his opposition to political horse-trading, highlighting his party’s introduction of Article 63-A to eliminate floor-crossing. He also called for further judicial reforms, referencing his father Asif Ali Zardari’s 12.5 years in jail and the injustices suffered by his family.
Bilawal also reflected on the oppressive actions faced by PPP workers during dictatorship eras, pointing to the Charter of Democracy signed by Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif in 2006 as a key step toward restoring the 1973 Constitution. The PPP leader praised the 18th Amendment achieved through this charter but criticized those currently championing the judiciary without understanding its history.
He lamented how under Chaudhry’s mindset, the judiciary allowed constitutional amendments by military rulers, remarking that after the judiciary’s “freedom,” only those in uniform were allowed to amend the Constitution.
Bilawal questioned why the public elects parliamentarians if lawyers are to make decisions. He acknowledged the dire state of affairs in the country but reminded the audience of the oppressive eras under previous rulers where speaking out was nearly impossible. He also critiqued the judiciary, questioning whether contempt of court means a lifetime punishment for criticizing a judge, while prime ministers can be removed and constitutional amendments made without challenge.