ISLAMABAD - The National Assembly Wednesday unanimously passed three government sponsored bills, including Anti-Money Laundering Bill 2015. The opposition members even did not move any amendments.
The other two bills passed without any opposition were the Companies (Amendment) Bill 2015 and the Stock Exchanges [Corporatisation, Demutualisation and Integration (Amendment)] Bill 2015. All the three bills were moved Finance Minister Ishaq Dar.
However, the Pakistan Baitul Maal Amendment Bill 2015 was deferred while the house witnessed rumpus over amendment to Halal Food Authority Bill 2015.
The anti money laundering bill is expected to pave the way for an effective policy against money laundering and terrorism funding. Under this law, reports regarding illegal transference of funds and their usages will be compiled for sole purpose of grounding terror networks and curbing growing insurgencies in the world.
Earlier, there was a commotion in the house as Jamaiat Ulama-e-Islam Fazal (JUI-F) demanded the Halal Food Authority Bill 2015 should be passed after banning the import and exports of non-Halal items.
JUI-F chief Fazlur Rehman argued the food authority should be mandated to keep check on import and exports of non-Halal items. “We are a Muslim country and we should discourage the import and export of forbidden food items,” he said, insisting the bill should be amended before making it a law.
It was also proposed that two members of the parliament, an MNA and a senator, be made members of the Hilal Food Authority. The bill was deferred as JUI-F lawmakers, including Naeema Kishwar, said there must be a complete ban on import of forbidden food items.
Earlier, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif made an appearance in the house and was encircled by both treasury and opposition members who gave him chits and then demanded allocation of funds for women development in the country.
Also yesterday, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle, particularly members of Jamat-e-Islami (JI), condemned execution of two opposition leaders in Bangladesh on Sunday for war crimes during the 1971 independence war, claiming the legal proceedings against them were flawed.
They blamed Dhaka for violating the 1974 tripartite agreement between Pakistan, Bangladesh and India, and said it was punishing politicians who opposed split of pre-1971 Pakistan.
The fiery debate in the assembly criticised the government for going soft on Dhaka and demanded stern action against the Bangladeshi regime, urging the government to summon High Commissioner of Bangladesh to lodge a strong protest.
Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs assured the house the government will swing into action and summon High Commissioner of Bangladesh to Pakistan. “Yes the government will lodge protest with Bangladesh by summoning its top diplomat in Islamabad,” the minister told the house.
A PML-N Lawmaker Moeen Watto said that Pakistan had been sympathetic to Bangladesh for being a Muslim country but Dhaka has always acted negatively and punished those who spoke in favour of Pakistan.
Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf MNA Shireen Mazari said the execution of opposition leaders violated the 1974 tripartite agreement between Pakistan, Bangladesh and India, and went against international laws and principles. Sahibzada Tariqullah of the JI said the United Nations should intervene and make Dhaka abide by the 1971 treaty.
Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mujahid and Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury had been hanged at Dhaka’s central jail in a move that was celebrated by supporters of the ruling Awami League though it angered opposition forces and invited outcry from international community and human rights activists.
The United Nations on Monday also renewed its call on the Bangladesh government to immediately impose a moratorium on capital punishment and abolish the practice altogether.
In a statement issued in Geneva, Ravina Shamdasani, spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said the government should not implement death sentences awarded by the International Crimes Tribunal, “given the doubts that have been raised about the fairness of trials conducted before the tribunal.”