Parties should allow open scrutiny of funding: IHC

Observes any citizen can seek security of a political party’s funds

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has observed that the process of accountability should be encouraged by all political parties and they should allow open scrutiny of their funding to ensure transparency in their affairs.

Hearing the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) foreign funding case on Thursday, the IHC judge Athar Minallah remarked that it is not a prejudice to any political party if any citizen seeks scrutiny of its funds.

“Why the PTI is panicking if the party’s affairs are transparent in connection with the foreign funding. It seems the PTI trusts the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) in all matters except this one,” he added.

The remarks came during the hearing of PTI’s petition against an order of the ECP to form a fresh ECP committee to scrutinise the PTI’s accounts under the foreign funding case.



The petitioner, the PTI Chairman Imran Khan, has requested the IHC to declare the proceedings initiated by the committee against him void, unlawful, without lawful authority and against the Constitution. Khan has made the ECP and Akber S Baber, a disgruntled member of PTI, respondents in the petition.

On Thursday, Khan’s counsel Anwar Mansoor Khan argued that the ECP is neither a court nor a tribunal but a constitutional and supervisory body. He said the PTI is ready to go for a scrutiny but the ECP is only listening to one petitioner Babar and not allowing the PTI to say anything in the scrutiny process.

The counsel said that PTI is aggrieved as the committee is not calling it at all and allegedly just doing scrutiny with Babar. He said the ECP cannot declare Babar a member of the party and that is why he was present before IHC. He said information may be obtained but ‘harassment’ cannot be allowed.

“How it is harassment if a person points out something,” Justice Minallah remarked, adding that things can either be correct or incorrect. The judge said the ECP being a regulator takes decision and political parties should be open to such applications.

He remarked that by removing one person [Babar] from the process, “we would be setting up a very bad example.” Also, he said, “I fail to understand why a political party is resisting. If he is declared not a member of a political party yet he is a citizen. It [scrutiny] should be encouraged. That’s accountability,” Justice Minallah remarked. He added that PTI can always challenge committee’s report.

Subsequently, the court issued notice to Babar and ECP and adjourned the case.



Background

In the petition, petitioner while referring to the IHC’s order passed on September 7, 2017, said the court had ruled that “the ECP shall not share the details of source of foreign funding of the PTI with any other individuals including respondent No. 2 [Babar] till final decision of this petition.”

In addition, the counsel said Babar did not come with clean hands because he approached the ECP after his expulsion from the party and “[Babar] is not free from malice, ill will and just aimed to harass the petitioner.”

It was maintained that the impugned order is based on malafide and is not passed in transparent manner. He added that Khan in compliance of IHC’s order submitted all documents before ECP.

The petitioner requested the court to set aside the ECP’s March 12 order and declare the committee proceedings as void, unlawful and without lawful authority and against the Constitution and law.