Both the Afghan State Ministry for Peace Affairs and the Taliban's spokesperson on Tuesday said that the Reuters report published earlier claiming that both sides of the peace negotiations had agreed on a code of conduct with a set of ground rules is untrue.

The spokeswoman for the State Ministry for Peace Affairs, Najia Anwari, said the news published by Reuters regarding the completion of the code of conduct for Afghanistan peace talks is incorrect.

The Taliban have also denied the report. 

The Reuters report claimed that both sides of the Afghan peace negotiations had agreed on the procedural rules for the peace talks, citing "three official sources," who said the Afghan delegates were helped by US officials.

The negotiating teams of both sides of the peace negotiations have held seven contact group meetings to reach an agreement on the two disputed points.

Contact groups from both sides have not met for the last six days.

According to delegates, the Taliban demanded recognition of the US-Taliban agreement as the 'mother deal' underlying the Afghan peace negotiations, and Hanafi jurisprudence as the sole religious legal guidelines for the talks.

The republic's team later suggested alternatives to the Taliban’s demands.

The opening ceremony for the negotiations was held on September 12, but the two sides of the talks have not yet started their direct negotiations. However, they have held over seven meetings between their contact groups to discuss procedural rules for the talks. The two sides have yet to agree on two matters: the religious basis for the talks and the relevance of the US-Taliban deal with the negotiations.

The regulations for the talks initially had 23 articles. They were reduced to 20 after meetings were held between the contact groups, and they still may change, say sources.

According to sources, these are the issues being debated:

Regarding the US-Taliban agreement, the republic's team recommended four options:

First option: The terms of the US-Taliban agreement could be accepted as underlying the talks, however, the terms of the joint declaration between the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, NATO and the US should also be accepted as applicable.

Second option: Neither the US-Taliban agreement nor the declarations of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan with the US and NATO will be recognized as having any authority, and the negotiations will move forward based on the decisions of the consultative Loya Jirga and the Jirga's declarations.

Third option: Both sides start talks "based on the national interest of Afghanistan."

Fourth option: The Quran and Hadith are the main authority for the talks, replacing all others.

The Taliban insist that talking about the Jafari jurisprudence under current circumstances is not logical but said that this can be discussed during the talks about the Constitution of the country.

Negotiations between the delegation representing the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the Taliban started on September 12 in Doha.