Parties bound to disclose source of funding: SC

ISLAMABAD – The Supreme Court yesterday observed that every political party was answerable regarding the source of funding under Article 17 of the Constitution.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Saqib Nisar heard Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz leader Hanif Abbasi’s petition against Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf chief Imran Khan and Secretary General Jehangir Tareen for having offshore companies.

When PTI counsel Anwar Mansoor started arguments, the chief justice said he must be fine now. The counsel replied ‘not perfectly’. Mansoor told the bench he had submitted written arguments.

When the chief justice questioned whether the Election Commission of Pakistan could take decision about political parties’ foreign funding, Mansoor said the Political Parties Order 2002 had been amended. The chief justice asked whether he wanted to say that after publishing political parties’ accounts in the gazette, the Election Commission could not scrutinise them. However, the chief justice noted that under the law, political parties were bound to disclose their funding.

Mansoor contended he never said PTI was not answerable about its foreign funding. Justice Umar Atta Bandial remarked, “You want to say the report of the party’s chartered account is final.” Justice Faisal Arab remarked no party would tell that it had received funding from prohibited sources.

Mansoor said that he had submitted the lists of PTI’s foreign donors and contributors. The chief justice said the Election Commission did not issue a clearance certificate after publishing the parties’ accounts in the gazette. “If that is the case, the ECP has not issued a clearance certificate to the PTI that it is not receiving funds from prohibited sources.” He said had the ECP issued the certificate, the situation would have been different.

The PTI counsel argued that since 1962 the ECP never raised the issue of foreign funding. The chief justice said in the past no one had ever objected to it. He said the ECP could proceed if it was brought into its knowledge.

Mansoor argued the ECP declared the PTI documents bogus without seeing them, adding how its case could be sent to the Election Commission. Justice Bandial said: “The ECP will not decide the matter without hearing you.” Mansoor said only the PTI case should not be singled out, adding other parties should also be referred to the ECP.

Ibrahim Satti, representing the Election Commission, said prior to objecting to the ECP report, Mansoor should have read it. He said the report says the ECP could examine parties’ funds if mala fide and fraud was pointed out.

Justice Bandial said the ECP had powers to scrutinise accounts of any political party, adding it could accept or reject the account reports. He questioned whether the ECP should ignore the matter if it comes to its knowledge after some years that a party was receiving funds from prohibited sources.

Mansoor argued all political parties, including the PML-N, were receiving funds from abroad. The chief justice asked the counsel if they referred the matter to the ECP with the direction that without being influenced by the apex court observation, it decided the matter.

Mansoor replied the petitioner had raised the objection that the PTI had received funds from a person named Jadhav. He asked whether Jadhav can’t be a Pakistani. The chief justice told him to give this explanation to the ECP.

Akram Sheikh, appearing on behalf of PML-N leader Hanif Abbasi, contended Imran Khan had evasively denied the allegation of prohibited source of funding. He stated that the total amount that was shown as remittances to PTI Pakistan from PTI USA (Texas) in FARA record from February 2010 to June 2013 civil miscellaneous applications (CMA) 7231/16 did not reconcile with the lists provided for the same period through CMA 5256/17 due to a substantive gap of the amount.

He filed the concise statement which says the total donation according to the lists provided to FARA by PTI USA, Texas, through CMA 7231/16 is $ 2.017 million while the total donation according to the list of donors of Pakistan origin provided by PTI through CMA 5256/17 is $ 1.919 million, so there is a difference of $ 98,619.

From March 2013 to March 2017, the total amount transferred to PTI Pakistan is $ 1.186 million while total donation according to the list of donors of Pakistan origin provided by PTI through CMA 5256/17 is $ 849,532, thus there is a difference of $ 532,234.

He claimed, similarly, there were discrepancies, lacunas and flaws in the lists of PTI USA, California. He said the cheating could be pointed out by the repeated entries of donors’ names. A total of 113 entries were copied and pasted twice to bridge the gap of donation that was received from prohibited sources.

The petitioner said the details provided by the PTI failed to meet the requirements under Section 5.201(C) of FARA law.

Source: The Nation