EDITORIAL: Given the glacial pace at which the foreign funding cases involving the PTI and the two other major parties, the PPP and PML-N, are moving, they are unlikely to come to a logical conclusion in the foreseeable future. According to a report appearing in this paper the other day, at a recent meeting the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) expressed "satisfaction" over the progress report of its Scrutiny Committee on the issue, telling the panel to continue its investigations and come up with a final report 'as early as possible.' Going by the committee's past performance that is unlikely to happen anytime soon.
The focus of attention has been the PTI to the exclusion of other parties, for the obvious reason that pursuing the case with assiduous attention has been a disgruntled former member of the party, Akbar S Babar. It does not seem to have mattered that his undisguised prejudice violated the principle of equity that holds 'he who comes to equity must come with clean hands'. It was on his petition that in March of 2018 the ECP formed a Scrutiny Committee head by the director general of its law department. That body was to complete audit of PTI's accounts within a month's time, but had little to show for its efforts until June of this year when it was told to submit its report by no later than August. The report that came after much cajoling was rejected by the electoral body saying, "the Scrutiny Committee, on the basis of documents provided by both the parties and collected from the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP), has neither scrutinized the record nor evaluated the evidence from the documents and failed to formed definite opinion." Once again, the scrutinizer was ordered to complete its work as soon as possible, but no later than six weeks. This renders unjustified the opposition parties' claim that the ECP was delaying the case due to government influence. For, had the ECP been taking its cue from the government it would have accepted the committee's flimsy report and closed the case instead of calling for a fresh exercise.
Meanwhile, the issue continues to hang fire. It's been more than two years since the case came to light. Yet the Scrutiny Committee has failed to deliver on its responsibility. In the absence of a deadline, it may take another two, three years i.e., if at all it is capable of offering a sound opinion. The case has exposed lack of professionalism on the ECP's part. Clearly, those charged with investigations and analyses have not been up to the task. Which is regrettable but unsurprising considering that most of the second and third tier officers have routinely been inducted on the basis of favoritism rather than merit. It is about time the electoral body took a hard look on its internal affairs, and made amends necessary to meet its obligations in an effective and expeditious manner. Fairness demands it take cognizance of the other parties' funding practices as well.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2020
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.