ISLAMABAD: The Prime Minister’s Inspection Commission (PMIC) has completed about 80 percent of fact- chancing inquiry into the important-hyped Pandora Papers exposures regarding coastal companies, plutocrat laundering, and duty elusion by bigwigs, and (in response to its queries) entered replies from nearly all public office- holders, functionaries, and generals whose names have appeared in the papers.
During the inquiry, it came to the PMIC’s notice that names of 700 Pakistanis, as claimed by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalist (ICIJ), have appeared in Pandora Papers, but the PMIC has so far entered 240 names from the institute, and those individualities are being probed.
Sources in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) told Dawn that contrary to a print that a curtain had been drawn on Pandora Paper’s exposures, the PMIC would meet its deadline for completing the first phase of the inquiry against 240 people by the end of this month (Jan 2022). The commission will further do on new names to be participated by the ICIJ.
“ Of these 240 people, there are around 40 public office- holders, functionaries, and military generals,” a source said, adding that nearly all of them had furnished their replies to the PMIC’s queries.
The commission believes that not all 240 indicted would have committed plutocrat laundering and duty elusion as opening enterprises abroad and placing means there wasn’t a crime unless they were involved in plutocrat laundering and violating duty laws.
Also Read: World leaders struggle to restrict Pandora Papers damage
Those whose names have formerly been published include some members of the civil press, retired mercenary and military officers and their family members, top businessmen, and possessors of some of the country’s top media houses.
Still, all of them aren’t believed to be shamefaced as some of them have only established off- reinforcement companies and didn’t situate any asset there, some of them did business through these companies but they didn’t commit any plutocrat laundering or duty elusion and some of them, who are abiding abroad, are bound to abide by duty and other laws of the countries they’re living in and not the laws of Pakistan.
For case, Finance Minister Shaukat Tarin, after his name appeared in Pandora Papers, clarified that he’d established a company abroad for his own private bank but didn’t situate any asset in the company.
Pandora Papers are said to be the largest disquisition ever conducted by the ICIJ through an institute of intelligencers across the globe. It was made public on Oct 3, 2021. The Pandora Papers are grounded on documents blurted to the ICIJ which expose coastal dealings by lords, chairpersons, and high ministers of further than 50 countries.
According to the ICIJ, Pandora Papers contain names of further than 700 Pakistanis who intimately enjoy or have possessed an array of companies and trusts holding millions of bones in coastal governance.
Also Read: What are the Pandora Papers?
“ Soon after the leak, the PMIC was assigned with the fact-chancing inquiry and the commission transferred a pro forma carrying some queries to maturity of 240 persons, except a many whose names haven’t been vindicated so far. The PMIC engaged applicable institutions and has so far managed to complete 80 percent inquiry,” the sources said.
The commission gave seven days to every indicted person for furnishing replies to the queries and all public office- holders, functionaries, and military generals have given their statements.
The commission, which has been probing the leak for three months, is being supported by the State Bank of Pakistan, Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan, Nadra, Pakistan Telecommunication Authority, and the Federal Board of Profit.
On Oct 25, the commission called two Pakistani intelligencers who were part of the Pandora Papers and sought names of the indicted and details about their off- reinforcement fiscal conditioning.
Still, except for many names, the commission couldn’t get any other information.
The PMIC communicated with the ICIJ for seeking information about the indictment, but the institute replied that it participated in similar information only with intelligencers.
According to the sources, the PMIC faced difficulty in vindicating the names of the indicted and getting further information about them. “ We couldn’t corroborate names of some indicted as Nadra (National Database Registration Authority) database showed thousands of persons with the same name,” an elderly functionary of the commission said.
He said nearly 30 to 35 names, out of 240, were still untraceable, but the commission was trying to get information about them through other sources and departments concerned.
