ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan has submitted a declaration to the Senate chairman, urging him to refer the matter to the Election Commission of Pakistan for the de-seating of Senator Saifullah Abro, who had voted in favour of the 27th Constitutional Amendment against the party line.
According to a source, a copy of the recently moved declaration has also been forwarded to the ECP. As per the law, if the Senate chairman fails to refer the matter to the electoral body within two days, it is deemed to have been referred automatically. Abro currently serves as chairman of the Senate Standing Committee on Economic Affairs.
Earlier, PTI Parliamentary Leader Barrister Ali Zafar had submitted a declaration to the office of the Senate chairman. However, under the law, such a step must be taken by the party head.
The declaration filed by Barrister Gohar, a copy of which is available with The News, reads: “In terms of Article 63A of the Constitution… I, in my capacity as the Chairman Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI)/Party Head, hereby submit this declaration that Senator Saifullah Abro has defected from the party (PTI). The declaration is being submitted for onward reference to the chief election commissioner for laying the same before the Election Commission in accordance with the said
Article 63A.” The party chairman also outlined the facts giving rise to the reference. These include: Senator Abro is a member of the PTI Parliamentary Party in the Senate. Prior to the voting on the 27th Amendment, a meeting of the PTI Parliamentary Party was convened, in which it was explicitly decided—and communicated in writing to all PTI senators that they were to oppose and not vote in favour of any legislative measure or bill relating to the 27th Amendment. The direction to oppose was also issued by the Parliamentary Leader of PTI in the Senate to all Senators, including Abro. The record confirms that this direction was properly conveyed to him and that he was fully aware of it. The direction was also widely published in the media.
However, during the voting on the 27th Constitutional Amendment conducted in the Senate on 10th November 2025, Abro cast his vote in favour of the amendment, contrary to the clear, unanimous and duly communicated direction of the PTI Parliamentary Party and its parliamentary leader. Again, on 15th of November 2025, in violation of the same direction, Senator Abro cast his vote in favour of the 27th Constitutional Amendment.
The declaration notes that show-cause notices dated 2nd of December 2025 and 10th of February 2026 were duly issued to Senator Abro and were received at his residential and official mailing addresses in Larkana and Islamabad, affording him full and adequate opportunity to explain why a declaration should not be made against him in terms of Article 63A.
This was done in compliance with the requirements of Article 63A. Despite the lapse of time, no reply or explanation was received from Senator Saifullah Abro. It was contended that by casting his vote contrary to this direction, he committed a deliberate and willful breach of party discipline. This squarely attracts the provisions of Article 63A of the Constitution, which stipulates that if a member of a parliamentary party composed of a single political party in a House votes contrary to any direction issued by the parliamentary party in relation to a Constitution (Amendment) Bill, he may be declared in writing by the party head to have defected from the political party.
After due consideration of the facts, the Parliamentary Party and the undersigned, as PTI chairman, have concluded that the conduct of Senator Abro in casting a vote in favour of the 27th Constitutional Amendment twice, contrary to the direction issued by the PTI Parliamentary Party, constitutes defection from the PTI. Senator Abro is therefore declared to have defected from PTI in terms of Article 63A.
“In view of the foregoing, it is requested that this declaration may kindly be referred to the chief election commissioner for laying it before the Election Commission for decision in terms of Article 63A,” it concludes.
