Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) members in the Constitutional Reforms Committee of the Parliament, once again, changed their stance and informed the Committee that the real issue with their party was renaming of the NWFP and not the modus operandi for appointment of judges in the superior courts.
A source privy to the deliberations of the Committee meeting informed TheNation that it was another ‘U’ turn made by the PML(N) leadership as on Thursday PML(N) Quiad had made it clear that besides renaming of NWFP, they had also serious reservations on the mechanism proposed for the appointment of judges in the superior courts. While in the Committee’s meeting on Friday PML (N) member said that the real issue with their party was renaming of NWFP while he did not mention any reservation on the proposed judicial commission for appointment of judges in the apex court.
[cubic:1f6m5pmo][/cubic:1f6m5pmo]
Sources in the Committee informed that almost all the members were annoyed with PML(N) for there attempt to torpedo the whole exercise of the constitutional reforms.
Even ANP member Haji Adeel read a poem indirectly criticising PML (N) for an attempt to sabotage the whole exercise of constitutional reforms. Without mentioning PML (N), Haji Adeel said that its move was no less than a ‘drone attack’ on the Committee’s working.
The temperature in the Committee room was a little high on Friday and members hailing from smaller provinces, especially from Balochistan, blew hot and cold over what they termed the irresponsible behaviour of the PML (N) leadership.
The sources in the Committee further informed that PML(N) member of the Committee, Senator Ishaq Dar tried to calm down the members and explained his party’s position on the constitutional reforms. He said that the real issue with his party was renaming of NWFP and not the composition of the judicial commission and quickly added that they were busy in negotiating with the ANP to resolve renaming issue amicably.
Meanwhile, there was consensus among the members that the issues resolved with consensus would not be reopened for discussion, as in this way a new Pandora’s box would open.

Source: The Nation