Imran Khan Challenges £190 Million Corruption Verdict, Cites Procedural Flaws
ISLAMABAD: Imran Khan, the former prime minister of Pakistan, has raised significant objections to his conviction in the £190 million corruption case, calling attention to what he claims are procedural errors, mishandling of evidence, and political victimisation by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB). He has requested that his conviction and 14-year sentence be overturned, stressing the lack of credible evidence and numerous procedural shortcomings.
In the appeal, led by Barrister Salman Safdar, Khan’s legal team pointed to key issues, including the findings from a UK Court of Appeal ruling on November 26, 2021. The judgement, issued by Lady Justice Nicola Davies, Lord Justice Nugee, and Lord Justice Snowden, clarified that the disputed funds were neither proceeds of crime nor linked to any illicit activities.
The case centers on a £190 million settlement reached by the National Crime Agency (NCA) in the UK with property tycoon Malik Riaz Hussain. This settlement stipulated that the funds be transferred to Pakistan’s Supreme Court account under a legal framework. Khan’s appeal argues that NAB failed to present critical evidence, including witnesses from the NCA, to support its claims. His legal team also highlighted that the case had been closed by NAB in 2020, following the NCA settlement, but was reopened in 2023, allegedly for political reasons.
The appeal challenges the authenticity of a confidentiality deed presented by the prosecution, which Khan’s lawyers argue was not verified through forensic analysis. They assert that the deed was merely procedural and had no connection to criminal activity.
Khan’s legal team also stressed that no personal financial gain was demonstrated in the case. The funds in question were reportedly deposited into the account of the Al-Qadir University Trust, a legally registered educational institution. The defence further argued that the prosecution’s evidence confirmed that neither Khan nor his wife personally benefitted from the funds.
The appeal also criticised the trial court for failing to adequately evaluate key evidence and testimony, particularly from prosecution witnesses and official documents that refute allegations of abuse of authority. Khan contends that NAB’s actions were politically motivated, pointing out that the bureau selectively targeted him while excluding other key individuals involved in the case.
Bushra Bibi, Khan’s wife, was also convicted and sentenced to seven years in prison in connection with the case. In her appeal, she argued that the case against her was politically driven and lacked substantial evidence. She emphasized that the prosecution failed to prove her involvement in the activities of the Al-Qadir University Trust, with the testimony of the trust’s Chief Financial Officer exonerating her, confirming that neither she nor her husband gained financially from the trust.
