ISLAMABAD: Chairman of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and former prime minister Imran Khan on Wednesday presented reply to the electoral commission of Pakistan (ECP) in case of Toshakhana against in which he admitted to selling at least four gifts he received during his tenure prime minister of Pakistan.
former the prime minister claimed that the sale of in gifts which he purchased from the public treasury after paying 21.56 million rupees, brought in about 58 million rupees. One of in gifts included Graff watch, pair of cufflinks, expensive pen and ring, and the other three gifts four Rolex watches included.
From July 2018 to June 2019, Imran Khan received total of 31 gifts and paid for only four as under rules Any gift below assessed value of Rs 30,000 can be left without any payment.
Edition: Toshakhan saga
From July 2019 to June 2020, he received nine gifts and paid amount of 1.71 million rupees for three of them. He claimed that gifted these gifts to some unknown persons. One of in gifts included box containing gold and diamond medallion, pair of eartips (gold and diamond) and diamond ring. He invested 0.544 million rupees in purchase it’s a decoration.
Lawyer of the head of the PTI terms Reference to Toshahana “politically motivated”
From July 2020 to June 2021, he received 12 gifts and paid amount of Rs 12.90 million for five of these. From July 2021 to June 2022, he received six gifts and paid 3.10 million rupees for two of present.
Mr Khan also said that as many as 329 gifts were received by various officials during his tenure; out of which 58 gifts including vases, art jewelry, medallions and decorative items were presented to him and his wife Bushra Bibi between August 1, 2018 and December 31, 2021. of all these gifts were only 14 items worth more than the 30,000 rupees he bought by paying money in accordance with regular procedure.
Barrister Ali Zafar, who represents the head of PTI, called for a five-member ECP bench invalidate the link against in former prime minister, as he called it a “misleading” case based on on unscrupulous intentions and political motives. Link was to misuse of power and the Constitution, the answer added.
During the hearing, Mr. Zafar said that, in the opinion of the Speaker of the National Assembly, the case on disqualification should be considered made pursuant to Article 63(2), while in reference sent to the ECP, the disqualification of Imran Khan was requested under Article 62(1)(f). He emphasized that the CJP could not hear a case under Article 62(1)(f). in proceedings of Article 63, adding that Article 62(1)(f) can only be applied by a court and not by a commission. To this ECP bench said that if the lawyer wanted to challenge jurisdiction of election observer, he may submit a separate application.
In August of this year, the Speaker of the National Assembly, Raja Perwaiz Ashraf, sent an appeal to the ECP demanding the disqualification of Imran Khan. in in light of The case of Toshakhana. The source claimed that Imran Khan did not reveal the details. of gifts taken from Toshakhana and amount received from the sale of these gifts.
Edition: Not need for secrecy
Nonetheless reply responded to these allegations and said that no member of The National Assembly declared mobile phones, watches, shoes and other similar items as assets before the commission date. reply added that four gifts was sold during 2018-19 financial year and the respondent did not have them gifts until June 30, 2019. “Therefore, they were not named by name. in statement of assets filed on December 31, 2019 amount was received in [a] Alfalah bank account and what amount has been duly mentioned,” added. Furthermore, total cost of gifts in the amount of 21,226,000 rupees was paid by the defendant and declared in tax return for in year 2019, it’s added.
Judging by the answer, the link is not competent in in first place as lack of reference under Article 63(2) of A constitution can be referred to a commission if one or more of involved “sixteen questions”. These “questions” are in article 63(1)(a) to article 63(1)(r), this added.
“Since no one of these issues are touched upon and even barely mentioned in titled link; thus the reference is wholly unfounded and misunderstood”, reply stated, asking ECP to close the case.
Published in Dawn, September 8, 2022