Imran Khan Alleges Flaws and Bias in £190m Graft Case Verdict

Imran Khan Alleges Flaws and Bias in £190m Graft Case Verdict

ISLAMABAD: Former premier Imran Khan has raised numerous concerns about the verdict that found him guilty in the PS190 million corruption trial, including significant errors in procedure, improper handling of evidence, and claims of political exploitation through the National Accountability Bureau (NAB).

The appeal requests that the verdict and 14-year sentence be reversed, highlighting the absence of credible evidence and procedural flaws.
The legal team of Mr Khan, led by barrister Salman Safdar, highlighted critical aspects of the appeal, including the findings from the United Kingdom Court of Appeal’s ruling, which was issued on November 26, 2021.
The decision, made by Lady Justice Nicola Davies, Lord Justice Nugee, and Lord Justice Snowden, confirmed that the money at the heart of the debate was not the proceeds of crime and did not relate to any illicit or illegal activity.
The UK’s National Crime Agency (NCA) has agreed to a PS190m settlement with the property businessman Malik Riaz Hussain, specifying that the money would go into the Pakistani Supreme Court account as part of an established legal framework, the appeal said.
Mr Khan’s appeal claims NAB omitted crucial evidence and failed to provide witnesses from the NCA or other relevant documents to prove the claims. Mr Khan’s legal team pointed out that NAB had already closed the investigation in 2020 after the settlement agreement with the NCA and claimed that the reopening in 2023 was conducted in bad faith and due to political motives.
The appeal also questioned the legitimacy of a claimed confidentiality declaration made to the prosecutor. The lawyer for Mr Khan claimed that this document had been untruthful without forensic analysis done to confirm its authenticity. They also claimed that the papers were procedural and no evidence indicated they were linked to any crime.

The lawyers of Mr Khan stressed that there was no financial gain for Mr Khan’s personal. was established. The money allegedly linked to the case was put into the accounts belonging to Al-Qadir University Trust, a legally registered trust for education.
“The prosecution’s evidence confirms that no donations or monetary benefits were received personally by Imran Khan or his wife,” the appeal claimed.
The defence also accused the trial judge of ignoring necessary evidence and procedural protections. “The trial court failed to properly evaluate critical evidence, including testimony from prosecution witnesses and official documents, which directly refute the allegations of misuse of authority,” the appeal stated.
Mr Khan has accused NAB of having a politically driven agenda and claimed that the bureau targeted him selectively and omitted other people implicated in the investigation. “The prosecution deliberately avoided implicating six other key accused individuals, raising serious concerns about the fairness and integrity of the investigation,” the appeal said.
Bushra Bibi, who was convicted of a crime and sentenced to seven years in prison in the trial, claimed that the prosecution was based on political motives and not supported by evidence of substance.
Bushra Bibi filed the appeal, saying she was disappointed with the prosecution’s inability to prove her involvement in aiding and assisting her husband in their involvement in activities of the Al-Qadir University Trust.
In her testimony, the Chief Financial Officer (PW-5) emphasized that she was exonerated by confirming that neither her husband nor she benefited in any way from trust funds or related transactions.