From Jamaat’s statements it appears that it would not allow this government its full term, of which today four and a half years are still left. Is it not anti--democratic thinking?

Jamaat did not take part in the elections that brought present Muslim League government to power. It was timely declared that if elections are held without accountability and proper screening, the process will be fruitless. Jamaat was not alone in asking "accountability first", it was the demand of every individual. Look! were not the people saying the same and reading the same in the daily newspapers and magazines? Jama’at then emphasized the need of screening candidates by the application of articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution; that in an Islamic country, the public representatives must have the basic knowledge of Islam; that they avoid indulging in major sins; that they carry out Allah's commands and obligations; and, that they be morally known behaving well. Article 63 of our Constitution lays down that anyone found corrupt and defaulter, can not become member of the parliament. But there is no screening machinery to ascertain whether a candidate conforms the requirement of articles 62 and 63.

Every body knows that accountability was not done at all by the interim government of Meraj Khalid and that the same fellows were being re-imposed who were responsible for looting the country. Jamaat therefore, took no part in those elections (February 1997) and it is not morally bound to accept the results. The nation stands witness that on the election day the polling stations remained deserted. The first day it was officially confessed that only 25 per cent voters turned out. The next day the figure was raised to 35 per cent, whereas in fact, the votes polled were not more than 20 percent. It was like some University syndicate. When it sees that the result is disastrous, it decides to doll out "grace marks" to the students and thus tries to save face. Exactly the same way, the election results were manipulated and the turn out raised from 20 to 35 percent to establish some credibility. In the current Iranian Presidential elections, the turn out reported was upto 90%. Even in Pakistan, in the past, twice the turn out has reached around the 60 percent mark. If therefore, even the government's verdict of "35 percent" is accepted it only tells that the majority did not vote, because people were fed up with both the groups (PPP and ML). The rulers may go on making tall claim of availing "three fourth" majority and "historic mandate", the fact remains that they represent a very small minority. If our struggle helps do away with such guess-works and dubious figures, saves this nation from the dooms-day and leads it to new heights, successes and pride, then our perception proves true. We shall work for the change at all cost. But, we will do so with popular support and after thorough preparations. We intend to accomplish this goal, because no one can be allowed to impose a tyrant system on the nation.

If, however, we fail to realize this great objective, it will be because of our own faults and short-comings. And if the bearers of this "overwhelming and historic mandate" fail to deliver what they promised, then the cause will be their own policies, poor conduct and misdeeds.