Statement — “Given that his ministry includes several hawala-tainted ministers, the Prime Minister has a moral obligation to resign,” says a politician. Assumptions — I. The politician is not close to the Prime Minister. II. The politician wants to promote moral principles in politics.

Introduction / Context:
The speaker argues from a moral standpoint: because ministers are “hawala-tainted,” the Prime Minister should resign. This presupposes a commitment to moral accountability in public office, not anything about personal closeness to the PM.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Ministry has tainted members.
• Claim: PM has a moral duty to step down.
• I: speaker is not close to PM (irrelevant to the argument’s logic).
• II: speaker favors moral standards in politics (supports the moral claim).

Concept / Approach:
For a moral-duty claim to be advanced sincerely, the speaker must value ethical principles in political conduct. The speaker’s relationship to the PM is neither required nor implied by the reasoning.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Even a close ally could advocate resignation on moral grounds; thus I is not necessary.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing background motives or relationships with logical presuppositions.

Final Answer:
Only Assumption II is implicit.