The Election Commission made the PTI foreign funding case decision public.
Home » The Election Commission made the PTI foreign funding case decision public

The Election Commission made the PTI foreign funding case decision public

by SG News Desk
0 comment

The PTI received funds from unreliable sources, according to a majority decision made by the Pakistan Election Commission (ECP) on Tuesday.
The party received funds from 34 foreigners, which was prohibited by the Constitution, the ECP ruled. Money was given to the party by the US, Australia, and UAE all together.
Additionally, it claimed that the party had received funding from a well-known US businessman.

The statement added that “13 unnamed accounts also discovered during the probe in the PTI funding issue,” “The party accepted monies from a US business personality,” and “other information.”

The PTI allegedly produced a fraudulent affidavit on the party’s financial statements, according to the ECP. It went on to say that Imran Khan, the PTI chairman, had provided the ECP with a fake F1 form.
Shah Muhammad Jatoi, Nisar Ahmed Durrani, and Chief Election Commissioner Sikandar Sultan Raja from the ECP made up the three-person panel that made the judgement.
The Commission is satisfied that the respondent party got the contributions and donations from unlawful sources, the ruling states.

Truth versus power in a battle

Following the pronouncement of the judgement, Akbar S. Babar, a founding member of the PTI who brought the lawsuit, thanked God and his late mother for aiding him in winning “this struggle.”
“We were having trouble moving a mountain. In this case, we won the battle between strength and truth.

Babar maintained that there was no profit to him personally in this circumstance; rather, Pakistan’s politics needed to change significantly so that political parties would be subject to legal oversight.
He congratulated the ECP and emphasized the need for the people to believe in and support government institutions.
The candidate remarked, “We have experienced numerous difficulties over the last eight years, but this specific electoral commission has accepted all of my arguments.

The ECP agreed that Imran’s certifications and the PTI’s funds originated from foreigners and businesses, according to Babar, who reaffirmed the judgment made by the electoral body.

He claimed Imran Khan “used to threaten PTI, would criticize the president of the election commission, and would attack people personally” and invoked the term “fascist.”
He claimed that the ECP’s decision was a step toward eliminating the PTI’s “fascist.”
Not in this situation, foreign money

The PTI has argued that “this was not a foreign fundraising case, this was a matter regarding prohibited money,” according to party leader Farrukh Habib.
He went on to remark that individuals who promoted the idea that the case was about “foreign money” were extremely dissatisfied that the PTI wasn’t banned today instead of receiving a show-cause notice.

He concluded by saying, “We’ll suitably respond to the notice.”
After Habib, Maleeka Bokhari declared in a television interview that the media’s current criticism of the PTI and the PDM coalition parties had “lost hope.”
She claimed that although the PTI was not the type of party to take foreign donations, “propaganda” had been circulated for years against it.

Committees of investigation were set up in 2018 to investigate PTI finances, but according to Bokhari, their results were never made public because they provided no proof against the party.

She claimed that the “largest democratic party” in Pakistan was being cornered by a constitutional institution.
She alleged that Benazir Bhutto had stated that the PML-N overthrew her administration using money from Osama Bin Laden, and she requested that PDM leaders divulge their bank account details. She also questioned whether the JUI-F had gotten cash from Libya’s Saif al-Islam Gaddafi.

Even though everything should have been done properly, it is regrettable that these parties are unable to constitutionally and legally compete with the PTI.
PTI’s Fawad Chaudhry thanked everyone who had taken part in the eight-year court battle.

“In Pakistan, only the PTI runs successful public fundraising efforts. This is something that no other political party does. According to the previous information minister.

The PTI had raised roughly Rs. 3–4 billion, the most of which came from Pakistanis residing outside of Pakistan, he asserted, and the lawsuit related to fundraising from 2008 to 2013.

He responded, “I don’t understand why PML-N, PPP, and JUI have made overseas Pakistanis their adversary when we consider them the backbone of our economy,” and adding that the party would still depend on them for funding when questioned about this.

“Prohibited sources” donations

S NoDonorsAmount
1Funds transferred from UAE-based company (Wootton Cricket Limited)$2,151,500
2Bristol engineering services FZ LLC Dubai$49,965
3E planet Trustees$100,000
4SS Marketing$1,741
5Funds collected through LLC-5975 donations and contributions and transmitted to PTI$1,976,500
6PTI Canada Corporation #$279,822
7Mrs Romita Shetty (Singapore)$13,750
8Funds collected through LLC-6160 donations and contributions and transmitted to PTI$549,000
Total dollars$5,122,278
9Dunpec Pty Ltd, AustraliaRs504,250
10Anwar BrothersRs78,000
11Zain Cotton Ptv LtdRs10,000
12M/s Young SportsRs97,500
13Amount received in 13 accounts (11 unknown, 2 not pertain) as per PTI during 2008-2013Rs215,787,718
14PTI Canada Corporation #4451121 (Pak rupees)Rs3,581,186
Total rupeesRs215,787,718
15PTI UK Reg#07381036£792,265

The ECP order’s main points

1) Wootton Cricket Limited, a company run and owned by business tycoon Arif Masood Naqvi, the owner of the Abraaj Group, and registered in the Cayman Islands, gave donations to PTI Pakistan with knowledge and intent. A willing recipient of $2,121,500 in prohibited funds was the respondent party.

2) In violation of Pakistani law, PTI Pakistan knowingly and willfully accepted donations from Bristol Engineering Services, an organisation with its headquarters in the United Arab Emirates, totaling US $ 49,965 into its accounts in Pakistan.

3) E-Planet Trustees, a Cayman island Pvt registered company trust with headquarters in Zurich, Switzerland, and SS Marketing, Manchester, a Pvt Company with headquarters in the UK, gave donations to PTI Pakistan wilfully and knowingly. Into its accounts in Pakistan that are subject to prohibition and in violation of Pakistani Laws was transferred from both companies a sum of US $ 101,741/-.

4) PTI Pakistan knowingly and willfully accepted donations totaling US$2,525,500 through PTI USA LLC-6160 and PTI USA LLC-5975. The amounts that PTI Pakistan received from both companies and deposited into its accounts are prohibited and against Pakistani law.

5) PTI Pakistan received donations worth US $ 279,822 and GBP 792,265 respectively through PTI Canada Corporation and PTI UK Public Ltd companies. Likewise, PTI Canada Corporation gave PTI Pakistan PKR 3,581,186 in donations. The donation funds that PTI Pakistan received from both businesses were subject to a ban and were against Pakistani law.

6) Dunpec Pty Ltd, an Australian company, and Anwar Brothers, Zain Cotton, and Young Sports (Pakistani businesses), who collectively donated PKR 689, 750 to PTI Pakistan, did so knowingly and willfully. The money that PTI Pakistan received from both companies and put into its accounts was against the law and prohibited.

7) 34 foreign nationals and 351 foreign-based companies donated to PTI Pakistan through fundraising campaigns run by PTI USA LLC-6160 and PTI USA LLC-5975. The foreign nationals’ collection of gifts and contributions from foreign people and businesses is forbidden and against Pakistani law.

8) PTI Pakistan has also been discovered to be the recipient of donations made by Ms. Romita Shetty, an Indian-American businesswoman with a base in the US. The restriction on donations from foreign nationals and the violation of Pakistani Laws apply to the sum of US$ 13, 750 that Romita Shetty donated.

9) In its submission to the commission, PTI acknowledged ownership of only eight (08) accounts, while declaring 13 accounts to fall under the category of unknown accounts and not be PTI accounts. All 13 of the accounts PTI disowned were opened and managed by senior PTI management and leadership at the Central and Provincial levels, according to data obtained from SBP. Additionally, PTI neglected to mention and disclose three accounts that were also run by the party’s senior leadership in this regard. The PTI leadership committed a serious reporting error and violated Article 17 (3) of the Pakistani Constitution by failing to disclose and/or conceal 16 bank accounts.

10) Based on the financial statements obtained by this Commission from SBP and other material in the public domain, the Form-I submitted by the chairman of PTI for the financial years 2008-09 to 2012-13 (Five Years) was found to be wildly inaccurate.

As a result, the matter is covered by Article 6(3) of the PPO, 2002, given the information that is on the record and the discussion that has been made above. As a result, the Commission orders that a notice be sent to the Respondent party in accordance with Rule 6 of PPR 2002 explaining why the aforementioned prohibited funds may not be seized. In light of this Commission order, the office is also tasked with starting any additional legal proceedings.

Following an explosive Financial Times article that exposed the PTI’s funding sources, there was an increase in demand for the announcement of the decision in this significant case.

It was a unique case in the history of the nation when the electoral body finally released the judgement on June 21 of this year, after reserving it for a record-breaking eight years. Akbar S. Babar, a founding member of the PTI and a former information secretary, submitted the petition in November 2014.


Don’t you think this post will be helpful to somebody else? Please share it to others via the social media button below Thanks for reading. Do well to drop your question in the comment box, we will be glad to hear from you.

You may also like

Leave a Comment

%d bloggers like this: