THE FATF verdict is out. And there are no surprises. After its three-day plenary, the Paris-based global money laundering and terrorist financing watchdog announced on Friday that Pakistan would be retained on its list of jurisdictions under increased monitoring, ie the grey list.
This was, of course, a disappointment to some who desperately wanted to see the FATF blacklist the country for not completing in time the 27 actions recommended for strengthening and removing the deficiencies in the AML/ATF regime. At the other end, those who thought the FATF would show more leniency and acknowledge the progress made in the last several months were too optimistic.
Although the FATF conceded that Pakistan has made significant progress and addressed 21 of the 27 items while partially addressing the remaining six, it decided to not change the country’s status. Instead, it gave Islamabad another four months to complete work on the remaining items, while strongly urging Pakistan to “swiftly complete its full action plan by February 2021 as all action plan deadlines have expired”. This is fair enough.
Ever since Pakistan was put on the so-called grey list in June 2018 for the second time in six years, few had imagined it would have been able to make so much progress. But the fact that the country has shown its political commitment and is able to satisfy the global watchdog in 21 areas in such a short time is no mean achievement. Rather, it should be celebrated as a victory. Yet, the real test starts now.
We have been given a very narrow window of time to achieve the rest of the targets — tougher ones pertaining to law enforcement’s capacity to identify and investigate the “widest range of terrorist-financing activity”. It wants “the investigation and prosecution [to] target designated persons and entities, and those acting on behalf or at the direction of the designated persons or entities”. Further, Pakistan has to demonstrate that terrorist-financing prosecutions result in effective and dissuasive sanctions. We also need to show the world that the provincial and federal authorities are on the same page on enforcing measures.
Indeed, this is a big ask from a country like Pakistan where large parts of the economy operate in the shadows and where law enforcers have little or no training in identifying, investigating and prosecuting financial crimes. But do we have a choice? It is, after all, in our own interest to remove weaknesses in our AML/ATF regime and strengthen our investigators and prosecutors not just because the FATF requires us to do so.
The fact that the government chose not to avail the option given by the FATF to not report at its meeting owing to the pandemic shows that we are confident that we can meet the next deadline with a bit of effort and political will. And we should — for our own sake.
Accountability fixation
IN a string of recent public addresses and interviews, Prime Minister Imran Khan has devoted much of his time to lambasting the opposition parties and vowing to accelerate the accountability process. During a conversation with ARY journalists on Friday, Mr Khan in a similar fashion during the near two-hour interview launched a blistering attack on his political opponents and pledged ‘not to forgive their loot till his last day’. That Mr Khan has taken the accountability drive so personally is unsettling; it not just challenges the principle of judicial neutrality but also indicates that his focus is largely on opponents instead of matters of governance. What is more troubling is that Mr Khan has already decided that if the people ever vote his political opponents into power, he will take to the streets in protest. He knows that the prime minister’s seat is not a birthright. With just two more years left till election season, he would do well to focus his energy on actually giving relief to the people and go beyond his vows of bringing back looted wealth. At present, the public is facing multiple crises due to food inflation, a shortage of gas and power, and mass unemployment. Simultaneously, a political crisis is unfolding which has seen the undermining of the Sindh police force — an episode Mr Khan surprisingly brushed off as a “non-issue” and went so far as dubbing a “comedy”.
While there is no doubt that allegations of financial mismanagement at the hands of public officer holders must be investigated according to the tenets of the law, Mr Khan’s relentless and dogged obsession with the opposition’s alleged theft is perhaps distracting him from the greater task at hand, which is to serve the people of this country and uphold their constitutional rights. By fixating on the accountability drive and constantly threatening to jail his political opponents, it appears Mr Khan is missing the forest for the trees; accountability, after all, is just one crucial aspect of governance. The prime minister would be well-advised to focus on the larger issues of bringing relief to citizens crushed by economic hardship. Raging against his rivals’ alleged theft was a good campaign slogan when he was in opposition, but it may not be enough for the public to vote for him in the next election if his policies fail to bring them relief after five years of government.
IBA cancellation
IT seems that Karachi’s prestigious Institute of Business Administration has been forced to cancel an online seminar scheduled for early November. It would have featured world-renowned economist of Pakistani origin Atif Mian talking about why the economy is slowing down in the country — something we should all be very concerned about. We are open to being instructed on money matters by experts who are not necessarily our co-religionists. However, there is one exception, and so impassioned has been the campaign against this particular community declared non-Muslim by an amendment to the Constitution that it is surprising that someone would still risk inviting a member of the community to an event — any event, even one that is purely academic. Was it the scenes of a group of young Pakistani students at a college in Punjab defacing a poster of the country’s first Nobel laureate that jolted the dreamers who had planned the seminar out of their reverie? The bets had been on for a while about the fate of the event. For some people, it was a lecture unlikely to be held in an atmosphere that encouraged faith-based bans on all kinds of pursuits.
The hosts have not been too forthcoming about the reasons for the cancellation. Some commentators on television channels, and more of them on social media, have been wondering whether it was outside pressure or overpowering voices from within that thwarted this ‘bold’ attempt to fight the taboo in our midst. All that would be of pure academic interest. Inside and outside, and all around, it is the same attitudes that dictate. The spell can only be broken by those in a commanding role — by a government that not only nominates Dr Mian as an economic adviser but one which can also stand by its choice even in the face of threats. This requires a leadership that can separate religion from other affairs of the state. How long will it take for the rulers to realise this?
