Shahzaib_Khan
Citizen
The fundamental flaw in your argument lies in Clause #2. You assume that the funds were recovered by the NCA from Malik Riaz and then released to the government of Pakistan. This is not the case.
The reality is that the NCA secured an account-freeze order based on allegations of money laundering and other illicit practices. The NCA is a prosecuting agency, much like the FIA and NAB, and it cannot recover or seize funds from anyone’s account without a trial, proving guilt in court, and obtaining a court order. The NCA required cooperation from Pakistan, including evidence of corruption and money laundering linked to Malik Riaz’s offshore companies in the British Virgin Islands and Panama.
The Pakistani government had to pursue Malik Riaz, investigate his offshore businesses, gather evidence of corruption, bribery, and money laundering, and present a convincing case in a UK court—something that would be almost impossible given Malik Riaz’s immense power and influence, as well as the inefficiency and vulnerability of Pakistan's prosecutors and criminal investigators.
Instead of following this long and fruitless route—largely under the pressure of Malik Riaz’s local influence—the Pakistani government could not agree to cooperate with the NCA or bear the hefty legal and prosecution fees.
As a result, the NCA was unable to proceed with a trial and prove Malik Riaz’s guilt in court. Consequently, it reached an out-of-court settlement with him.
While the exact terms of the settlement are confidential, it is understood that:
1. The NCA would unfreeze Malik Riaz’s accounts and drop any charges of guilt.
2. Malik Riaz would pay the funds to the government of Pakistan, but the money would go toward settling his debt/fine owed to the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
In essence, the out-of-court settlement stipulated that the funds would be directed to the Govt of Pakistan but to the Supreme Court’s account, not the national exchequer.
This is how out-of-court settlements typically work: one party gives something in exchange for something else from the other party -- Govt of Pakistan got the money although in liu of the fine and debt settlement saving the hassle of pricely and potentially futile efforts of proving Malik Riaz guilty and Malil Riaz got part of his debt settled and no findings of guilt in UK.
Pakistan previously tried—and failed—to pursue cases against Zardari and Nawaz in relation to Surry Mahal and Avenfield properties. We all know why those cases were not successful, because of prosecution and Establishment. Why would you believe that the same system wouldn't have favored or extend its olive branch to Malik Riaz as well??
Thus, the funds received by the Pakistani government in the SC accounts were directly transferred by the Riaz family from their previously frozen accounts. This further proves it that the funds were never recovered nor transferred by NCA to govt of Pakistan in State Bank or national treasury.
Now, regarding the cabinet’s blanket approval: this was simply the approval of the deed of the confidentiality clause in the out-of-court settlement, confirming that it had been reached with the government’s agreement.
Now, as a supporter of the PDM, PML-N, or prosecutor in this case, you were only needed to prove three things beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. That the out-of-court settlement explicitly stated that the funds should be deposited into Pakistan’s National Exchequer and not the Supreme Court’s account Or any proof that NCA got right of the money in UK and transferred it to the government of Pakistan which govt of Pakistan transferred to the SC account (which definitely did not happen).
2. That there is undeniable proof that all the land and donations related to the Alqadir Trust were part of a quid pro quo arrangement. You can’t prove this unless you establish Point #1.
3.That a Trust can be used for personal financial gain under the legal framework of a Trust Registration Act in Pakistan, and if so, whether there is proof that Imran Khan or Bushra Bibi did so.
I hope this clarifies to you why this is not an "open-and-shut" case because it is not!
And one final question: If you are not a blind supporter of the PDM, ask yourself this:
Malik Riaz owes over $3.5 billion in fines. The 190 million pounds (about $250 million) received still leaves him a balance of $3.25 billion. How much of this remaining amount has Malik Riaz paid to date? What has the PDM government done to recover this? I assume nothing. So, if it was not for this out-of-court settlement, do you honestly believe any money would have been recovered at all? Also, do you seriously think that Pakistan’s FIA and NAB could prove Malik Riaz’s guilt in a UK court?
And the most important question: While so much is being made of Imran Khan supposedly causing National Exchequer a loss of 190 million by directing the funds to the Supreme Court’s account, let’s look at the bigger picture. Wasn’t the entire $4 billion fine tied to land-grabbing related to Bahria Town Karachi? Who allowed or even facilitated that land grab? Isn’t it Zardari?
So, the president and head of the ruling coalition in your government is the one responsible for the entire $4 billion loss to the national exchequer and the root cause of this entire issue. Yet, somehow, the loss of a mere $190 million is being blown out of proportion to the IK if it is the sole or only money Riaz ows and if PDM has nothing to do with the loss??
It’s ironic, to say the least !
