Tangled web

The Al-Qadir Trust case continues to cast a shadow over former prime minister Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi. The 190 million pounds scandal now threatens to further entangle Bushra Bibi who has been handed an 11-point questionnaire by NAB as she appeared before NAB authorities on Monday. The gravity of the situation – as the accountability watchdog perceives it – is evident in the questions presented to her. The subtext is clear: NAB is saying there are intricate layers regarding the former first lady’s involvement in the alleged corruption scandal.

Among the pivotal inquiries is Bushra Bibi’s educational background, questioning the foundation of her knowledge and qualifications; how the Al- Qadir University Project trust came about; how she became a trustee; what the financial aspects were – the narrative being that there are glaring questions of transparency and accountability. Not least is the purported connection between Bushra Bibi and Farhat Shehzadi aka Farah Gogi whose involvement in financial transactions during the PTI government has been under question for some time now. All this comes about as the political arena faces another upheaval in the form of the caretaker federal cabinet greenlighting a jail trial for PTI Chairman Imran Khan and PTI Vice Chairman Shah Mahmood Qureshi in the cipher case; the jail trial has been justified on the basis of ‘security concerns’.

First, the Al-Qadir case: the case involving Imran Khan, his wife Bushra Bibi and other PTI leaders, is about a NAB inquiry related to a settlement between the PTI government and a property tycoon, which reportedly caused a loss of 190 million pounds to the national exchequer. As per the charges, Imran and others allegedly adjusted Rs50 billion – 190 million pounds at the time – sent by Britain’s National Crime Agency (NCA) to the government. They are also accused of getting undue benefit in the form of over 458 kanals of land to establish the Al Qadir University. Imran is accused of giving a blanket permission for this money to be used for a court settlement in Pakistan when the money belonged to the national exchequer.

Second, the cipher case, which stems from the diplomatic document that had apparently gone ‘missing’ while being in Imran Khan’s possession. If we recall, the PTI chairman had used said cipher to allege that it was evidence the US wanted to and played a role in ousting Imran from office. The PTI chairman had gone back and forth on this later on: at times, saying it wasn’t the US that initiated things and at times going back to the original claim: the US did indeed play the provocative role in ousting him. The government charge-sheet says that the PTI chairman had “illegally retained and wrongly communicated” the cipher which contained “top secret information” and that the former prime minister had used the cipher in a rally and “willfully communicated” classified information to the public.

While this dual saga of scandal and legal battles brings into question the integrity of key political figures, underscoring the need for transparency, accountability and a thorough investigation into alleged wrongdoings, questions have been raised by legal experts and political analysts as to the approach taken by government and state on both accounts: the Al-Qadir Trust case and the cipher case. Why the need for a jail trial? When so much is at stake, say legal experts, why not ensure transparency also in the judicial process of something this important? A former prime minister being on trial for ‘exposing’ state secrets is no small matter and is an uncomfortable reminder of the cases of sedition and treason lobbed at out-of-favour politicians in our history. Ensuring this is done transparently, without any perception of vendetta or witch-hunt, would surely be the right way to go about this. As for the Al-Qadir Trust case, investigations are necessary into exactly how this transpired, who all were involved, and what this means in terms of the criminality of it all. But none of this will be possible if this is a half-baked attempt to only gun for the ‘political’ figures involved in this case. For justice to be done, it cannot go half-way without addressing all the elephants in this room of scandal.