Ijaz Kakakhel Islamabad
A legislative body of Upper House of parliament on Tuesday expressed dissatisfaction with the State Bank of Pakistan’s (SBP) response regarding the investigation into substantial money laundering by solar panel importers.
The Senate Standing Committee on Finance and Revenue, led by Senator SaleemMandviwalla, held a meeting at the Parliament House, suggesting that the SBP might be withholding crucial details and proposing an in-camera meeting for further discussion.
During the deliberations, it was noted that the deputy governor failed to provide sufficient details on actions taken against accused parties and banks involved in money laundering. The committee learned that banks had filed 9,170 Cash Transaction Reports (CTSs) against importers flagged by the SBP, resulting in penalties totaling approximately 9 crore rupees for around 69 billion rupees of overpricing. Actions were taken against 17 bank officials.
The committee argued that the imposed penalties did not align with the gravity of the crime and advocated for enhanced legislation with stricter penalties for offenses impacting the country’s economy. Additionally, the committee recommended further discussions on fortifying rules and regulations, requesting a comprehensive, tabulated report on the number of banks involved, the amount of money in laundering activities, and the penalties imposed. In a separate briefing on the reported strategic cooperation agreement between HBL and the Bank of China, the committee learned that a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for Strategic Cooperation had been signed. The committee commended this initiative, anticipating improved trade opportunities for Pakistan.
The State Owned Enterprises (Governance and Operations) (Amendment) Bill, 2023, introduced by Senator Bahramand Khan Tangi, was deferred. The committee proposed presenting a comparative report between the previous bill and the proposed amendments for a comprehensive evaluation. The bill aims to amend the act, ensuring the board’s detachment from the day-to-day functioning of the company. It was argued that directors using company assets for political purposes should be disqualified, and the appointment of the CEO should shift from the board to the controlling ministry after board recommendation.
