Ex-PTI leader calls ECP’s scrutiny panel ‘fact-hiding committee’

Says now questions were being raised about the integrity of the ruling party

Saqib Virk June 01, 2021
Akbar S Babar. PHOTO: INP/FILE



Akbar S Babar, a disgruntled member of the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), on Monday said the sub-committee of the scrutiny committee of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) had failed to provide his legal team with the bank statements of PTI's accounts.

Talking to media after the hearing, he said the scrutiny committee was hiding the facts against the orders of the ECP, terming the fact-finding committee a "fact-hiding committee".

"We are going to do in 55 hours what the scrutiny committee could not do in three-and-a-half years."
Questions are being raised about the integrity of the ruling party, Babar said, adding that "the stifling environment created by the government to hide the facts will end soon".

The sub-committee, in its last meeting, reviewed the financial documents of the ruling party. The perusal process had ended as the ECP had allowed only 40 hours for the scrutiny of PTI accounts by two financial analysts nominated by Babar.

Earlier, Babar had registered a petition against committee's February 9 order to keep the PTI financial documents secret, including the ruling party’s 23 bank statements revealed on the instructions of the State Bank of Pakistan.

The petitioner had demanded perusal of all original accounts requisitioned through the SBP which had not been disclosed by the scrutiny committee.

On May 21, Babar had questioned the logic of ECP scrutiny committee’s refusal to allow perusal of original PTI bank statements.
Babar had claimed he would present the facts before the election commission in the next few days which would bring a “billion tsunami”.

He said the scrutiny committee could not complete the probe in three years while they were given only 40 hours for the examination of PTI accounts.

He said they would acquire the details of the ruling party’s private accounts no matter if they had to approach the top court for the purpose.


Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ