PESHAWAR: Members of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly on Thursday complained about the military`s interference in politics and insisted that onlya few individuals were responsible for the current `political anarchy` in the country.

During a session chaired by Idrees Khattak from the panel of chairpersons, the lawmakersalso vowed to contest the federal government`s proposed amendments into the Constitution.

`There is anarchy in the country just because of a few individuals, who are part of the armed forces and the judiciary and want to run the system according to their willbut we won`t allowthem to do so,`law and parliamentary affairs minister Aftab Alam Afridi told the house.

He said the Constitution clearly defined the word `state` but hadno mention of the `establishment.

The minister said the PTI hadexposedthe current system of governance.

`The entire game of the ouster of former prime minister Imran Khan was played by those who called themselves establishment,` he said.

Mr Afridi alleged that on May 9, a crowd was incited by intelligence agency`s agents to violence in Kohat and the people who shared its videos faced threats.

He said the PTI leaders were detained and pressured to leave Imran Khan and join former chief minister Pervez Khattak`s party, but most of them refused and preferred toface concocted cases.

The minister praised the province`s judiciary for dispensing justice to those political detainees.

He said there was no doubt that the country required a strong military for its defence, but it should confine itself to the constitutional role. Mr Afridi alleged that most of the businesses run by the Pakistan Army evaded billions of rupees worth of taxes every year.

Iftikhar Mashwani, another treasury member, contested the denial of the InterServices Public Relations director-general about the army`s involvement in politics and insisted that he was pressured by the establishment to quit the PTI.`After being called by a major, I stayed in Nowshera for two nights before being shifted to Peshawar where the ISI sector commander asked me to choose between the state and the PTI. I replied that I stood with both. The sector commander asked me to choose the state to prevent detention like PTI founder Imran Khan, but I went for the PTI,` he said.

MPA Munir Hussain Laghmani said the Constitution was being tarnished, so all parliamentarians should get together for its protection.

Lawmaker Akhtar Khan said he thought parliament was the supreme institution, but 10 MNAs, who represented 10 million people, were picked up by masked men from inside parliament.

`People are losing trust in the system, so I request institutions to work on improving law and order situation and controlling militancy in Balochistan,` he said.

He urged authorities to produce footage of the May 9 violence for the identification of culprits. Member of the opposition PML-N Sobia Shahid said the army was called for help in natural disasters and even if `something bad happens here, the army will come to our protection and not the police.

She said the PTI denied attacking mili-tary installations but there was evidence of its involvement in violence.

The lawmaker warned that participants of the upcoming PTI public meeting in Lahore would face serious consequences.

She alleged that the legislation done by the provincial assembly in the last 12 years benefited individuals.

Another opposition member, Nisar Baaz of the ANP, said undemocratic forces had been interfering in the country`s politics since 1947 and not for the last two years.

PML-N MPA Shehla Bano said the lawmakers, who were currently speaking against a state institution, used to call former ISI chief retired General Faiz Hameed an asset and former army chief retired General Qamar Javed Bajwa a champion of democracy.

She said the PTI activists shouldn`t expect a red carpet treatment after desecrating and attacking military memorials and installations.

The lawmaker also flayed Afghan diplomats for remaining seated during the playing of Pakistan`s anthem during a ceremony, declaring their act against diplomatic norms.