— PTI says its demand for immediate access to incarcerated founder Imran Khan was the principal sticking point in negotiations with the government, claiming the Centre refused to include the issue in a proposed agreement despite the party’s willingness to set aside other demands.
By Irum Saleem
The Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) on Sunday said negotiations between the opposition and the government broke down primarily because the Centre refused to incorporate provisions concerning access to incarcerated party founder Imran Khan into a proposed agreement.
The statement came a day after hours-long negotiations between an opposition delegation comprising the PTI and Tehreek-i-Tahafuz-i-Ayin-i-Pakistan (TTAP), and a joint government and PPP team ended without an agreement.
The breakdown prompted competing accusations, with the federal government holding the PTI responsible for the failure of the talks, while the opposition party rejected the allegation and said the government was responsible for the impasse.
In a statement posted on social media, the PTI expressed regret that the negotiations concluded without substantive progress despite what it described as “serious efforts” to resolve issues contributing to political instability and the deteriorating security situation in the country.
The party said the discussions had covered several issues, including political tensions, access to Imran Khan, his medical treatment and the worsening law-and-order situation, particularly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
However, according to the PTI, the “principal point of the deadlock” was its demand for immediate access to Imran Khan.
The party said its leadership needed to meet Imran in order to consult him on matters of “national and political importance”.
It claimed that the government had agreed to restore meetings between the former prime minister and his family members and lawyers from Tuesday, but did not accept additional PTI demands relating to his medical assessment and treatment.
The PTI said its negotiating team had attempted to break the deadlock by offering to set aside its other demands if the government agreed to its request concerning access to Imran.
“However, according to PTI, the government declined to make access to Imran Khan part of the proposed agreement,” the party said.
The development has further complicated efforts to reduce political tensions between the government and the opposition, particularly as the PTI has continued to press for greater access to its incarcerated founder.
The party has also raised concerns over the political situation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the province’s worsening security situation, making the issue of dialogue particularly significant amid heightened tensions between the federal government and the PTI-led provincial leadership.
The government, however, has presented a different account of Saturday’s negotiations. Federal Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi said the talks had collapsed and accused Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi of sabotaging the negotiating process.
The PTI rejected the government’s version, maintaining that it had made efforts to keep the dialogue process alive and had even offered flexibility on its demands in an attempt to reach an agreement.
The failure of the talks means that no joint framework has so far emerged on the issues that brought the two sides to the negotiating table. The dispute over access to Imran Khan remains particularly contentious, with the PTI treating it as essential for political consultation, while the government has so far resisted making it part of a formal agreement.
The deadlock also comes at a politically sensitive time, with tensions already high between the federal government and the PTI over political, legal and security-related issues.
For the opposition, the latest breakdown represents another setback to efforts to establish a negotiated mechanism for resolving the political crisis. For the government, the PTI’s position and demands remain a major obstacle to progress.
The immediate focus is now expected to be on whether the two sides can revive the dialogue process or whether the collapse of Saturday’s negotiations will further deepen political confrontation.
