Spokesman Report
KARACHI: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Sindh President and former Federal Minister Syed Ali Haider Zaidi demands action on Federal Finance Minister Miftah Ismail’s money laundering case, which is pending with National Accountability Bureau (NAB). Mr. Zaidi reminds the public and the relevant law enforcement agencies of the facts about the pending money laundering case against current Federal Finance Minister Miftah Ismail and Ismail Industries Limited.
Bank Al Falah reported a Suspicion Transaction Report (STR) against Miftah Ismail on inconsistent transactional activity in his accounts, i.e. A/C No. 1004326467 at Bank Al Falah Main Branch, Karachi and A/C No. 6-1-1-20311-714-202848 Habib Metropolitan Bank Main Branch, Karachi. Mr. Ismail opened his personal account 1004326467 at Bank Al Falah Main Branch, Karachi on 10-7-2014 wherein aggregated credit turnover of PKR356.422 million was observed.
Furthermore, bank records show that between 2013-2018, a huge amount of PKR1.306 billion came into the personal accounts of Miftah Ismail Ahmad and his close family members through TT (telegraphic transfers).
The sender of these funds was M. Ismail Ahmad/Farzana Muhammad who’s also a brother of Miftah Ismail with the places of remittance being UAE/Bahrain/ British Virgin Island. Most of the above funds were later sent to the accounts of Ismail Industries Limited. It’s unclear what the purpose is for sending the money indirectly into Ismail Industries instead of directly and thus, this requires further investigation.
Mr. Zaidi believes that the way the above funds were transferred is established evidence of Miftah Ismail parking corruption money in mutual accounts through commingling and layering to hide its sources. Plus, Mr. Ismail’s alleged money laundering is a classic money laundering case as the source/origin of the funds is unknown.
The money laundering inquiry was initiated by NAB in February this year and then proceedings were stopped in April, as now Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) 2010 has been detached from NAO (NAB Ordinance), and so, the case will likely be closed by NAB.