What's new

Tosha Khana Record about Maryam Nawaz, PMLN and PDM

HAIDER

ELITE MEMBER
May 21, 2006
32,266
14
33,320
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
1678937290129.jpeg
 

Sugarcane

ELITE MEMBER
Jun 2, 2011
20,918
29
41,319
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan

Q01: Why would anyone release the toshakhana 'dataset' in pdf format? It is as if someone wants hundred of people to waste their time taking screenshots and being stuck in manual analysis. It doesn't make sense, with all the 'Digital Pakistan' efforts going on over the years.

Q02: How come this dataset is not already part of a proper database, with a timeline and images of gifts' arrival and retention. What does that say about our other national assets if accountability couldn't be maintained for these millions of dollars of gifts?

Q03: What is the definition of a 'gift'? There are rows, certainly, but some rows have a 'vase,' for instance, while some have ten different high-value items bundled on the same row.

Q04: Who gave these gifts? That is one important piece of information completely missing from the picture. If these gifts are to lobby and influence our past and present rulers, which is usually the case, that data should also be released.

Q05: Who assesses the price of these items, and how fair and transparent is the process? Most of the items seem quite undervalued, at a glance, even without factoring in the USD over the years.

Q06: For the gifts that were auctioned off, who conducted the auction, who were the allowed participants, and why are the buyers not included in the dataset? Does 'Presented to' equal 'Bought by' if a gift is retained, or can anyone buy off anyone else's gift?

A few observations on the dataset: A lot (~323) of the gifts still don't contain the recipient's name. They do contain designations, but I'm not inclined to find out who the "Leader of the House, Senate" was at a certain date, so all such gifts are labeled "Anonymous".

One would expect spelling consistency, as this was recently digitized, but the norm seems that no two entries for the same person should match. A Muhammad Omer (just an example) is likely M. Omer, Mohammed Umar, Mohammad R. Omar, and Dr. M. Umer in different rows!

Then there are instances like Shafeq vs. Shafiq, Kureshi vs. Qureshi, Afzal vs. Afzaal, each pair for the same person, which makes this practice look either careless or deliberate. Still, I'll go with Occam's razor on this one.

The one exception to this make-all-names-different rule is 'Mr. Asif Ali Zardari', whose name is somehow meticulously accurately spelled for all 180 or so entries under his name, which is quite strange.

Around 50% of the gifts seem to have been received by ten-ish people, and 20% of the people received 80% of the total gifts (H/T Mr. Pareto), regardless of who retained what percent of those gifts. Some obvious angels retained less than 50% of their received gifts ;-)

There seem to be 1200+ watches. Some of the entries have two, or even three watches, in the same row. I have not split them up yet and have not touched the assessed and auctioned values' data, but I might do so if there is enough interest (READ retweets).

What I have attempted, though, is to consolidate all the gifts for anyone who seems to be the same person, so Dr. X, Mr. X, and Mr. M. X are merged under a single name. Any Son/Daughter/Wife of..., and gifts to people rising through the ranks are also merged.

If a row contains a list, or a list of lists, of gifts, I have split each such gift(s) into its own rows. This gives a more accurate set of counts (increased from 4000 to 6000) than the original distribution. People's salutations have also been extracted while fixing the names.

Sorting the latest sheet by the 'fgivenname' and comparing it with the 'frecipient' column should present an interesting view of how shuffled the data was. I'll merge fixes if anyone points them out - I have opened up comments on the sheet for this.

With all the party affiliation switches and horse-trading over the years, I have not bothered with identifying any individual's political party or professional capacity.

The next logical step for the cleanup would be to clean up each gift's assessed and final price. I'm open to tackling the next cleanup phase if the data, in its current state, is deemed useful by enough people, and they ask me to.

Disclaimer: I've used a mix of Python, regex, and some manual tweaking, where absolutely necessary. Mistakes and inaccuracies are expected. I'll try to fix things that are pointed out to me. The toshakhana semi-clean dataset --> ToshaKhanalysis

Then there are rows like this - where THREE items are listed, but the assessed prices of FOUR are mentioned, making the data integrity questionable.
FrgTuBBWYAQjCFt


The sheet is partially updated with the easily parsed assessed values of the gifts in the 'fassessedvalue' column. The most expensive gift so far - a Rs. 140,000,000 watch - "Displayed at the MP House". It doesn't which house, or whether it is displayed on a wrist, or in a case.
Frg7-HbX0AA_3IQ


Another Rolex desired to be displayed at the PM House. Why would a recipient who does not live in the PM House 'desire' to display a Rolex in the PM House? Who in the world displays (expensive but quite common) watches in any country's PM House? "Oh, look, we got a Rolex gift?"
FrjtDBRXwAECcJ9


An innocent #toshakhana typo, that reduces the value of a set of gifts by 1/1000, from 847000 to 847.
FrmDX7EWIAEbY1d


This entry lists ONE watch but lists the prices for TWO, further increasing the confidence in the released toshakhana dataset.
Froy4vOXoAAwOQu


'One small packet' and 'One large packet' were magically assessed to be worth Rs. 4,000, and nobody asked how.
Fro4ANPWwAErukw


A Ladies' Handbag for a First Lady should not be assessed at Rs. 2,000 unless the era is the 1800s. The gift-giver must have been really cheap. Even the maid at my house has a bag worth more than 2,000.
Fro-Y5fXgAExFkI
 

Hasan143

MEMBER

New Recruit

Mar 30, 2023
4
0
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan

Q01: Why would anyone release the toshakhana 'dataset' in pdf format? It is as if someone wants hundred of people to waste their time taking screenshots and being stuck in manual analysis. It doesn't make sense, with all the 'Digital Pakistan' efforts going on over the years.

Q02: How come this dataset is not already part of a proper database, with a timeline and images of gifts' arrival and retention. What does that say about our other national assets if accountability couldn't be maintained for these millions of dollars of gifts?

Q03: What is the definition of a 'gift'? There are rows, certainly, but some rows have a 'vase,' for instance, while some have ten different high-value items bundled on the same row.

Q04: Who gave these gifts? That is one important piece of information completely missing from the picture. If these gifts are to lobby and influence our past and present rulers, which is usually the case, that data should also be released.

Q05: Who assesses the price of these items, and how fair and transparent is the process? Most of the items seem quite undervalued, at a glance, even without factoring in the USD over the years.

Q06: For the gifts that were auctioned off, who conducted the auction, who were the allowed participants, and why are the buyers not included in the dataset? Does 'Presented to' equal 'Bought by' if a gift is retained, or can anyone buy off anyone else's gift?

A few observations on the dataset: A lot (~323) of the gifts still don't contain the recipient's name. They do contain designations, but I'm not inclined to find out who the "Leader of the House, Senate" was at a certain date, so all such gifts are labeled "Anonymous".

One would expect spelling consistency, as this was recently digitized, but the norm seems that no two entries for the same person should match. A Muhammad Omer (just an example) is likely M. Omer, Mohammed Umar, Mohammad R. Omar, and Dr. M. Umer in different rows!

Then there are instances like Shafeq vs. Shafiq, Kureshi vs. Qureshi, Afzal vs. Afzaal, each pair for the same person, which makes this practice look either careless or deliberate. Still, I'll go with Occam's razor on this one.

The one exception to this make-all-names-different rule is 'Mr. Asif Ali Zardari', whose name is somehow meticulously accurately spelled for all 180 or so entries under his name, which is quite strange.

Around 50% of the gifts seem to have been received by ten-ish people, and 20% of the people received 80% of the total gifts (H/T Mr. Pareto), regardless of who retained what percent of those gifts. Some obvious angels retained less than 50% of their received gifts ;-)

There seem to be 1200+ watches. Some of the entries have two, or even three watches, in the same row. I have not split them up yet and have not touched the assessed and auctioned values' data, but I might do so if there is enough interest (READ retweets).

What I have attempted, though, is to consolidate all the gifts for anyone who seems to be the same person, so Dr. X, Mr. X, and Mr. M. X are merged under a single name. Any Son/Daughter/Wife of..., and gifts to people rising through the ranks are also merged.

If a row contains a list, or a list of lists, of gifts, I have split each such gift(s) into its own rows. This gives a more accurate set of counts (increased from 4000 to 6000) than the original distribution. People's salutations have also been extracted while fixing the names.

Sorting the latest sheet by the 'fgivenname' and comparing it with the 'frecipient' column should present an interesting view of how shuffled the data was. I'll merge fixes if anyone points them out - I have opened up comments on the sheet for this.

With all the party affiliation switches and horse-trading over the years, I have not bothered with identifying any individual's political party or professional capacity.

The next logical step for the cleanup would be to clean up each gift's assessed and final price. I'm open to tackling the next cleanup phase if the data, in its current state, is deemed useful by enough people, and they ask me to.

Disclaimer: I've used a mix of Python, regex, and some manual tweaking, where absolutely necessary. Mistakes and inaccuracies are expected. I'll try to fix things that are pointed out to me. The toshakhana semi-clean dataset --> ToshaKhanalysis

Then there are rows like this - where THREE items are listed, but the assessed prices of FOUR are mentioned, making the data integrity questionable.
FrgTuBBWYAQjCFt


The sheet is partially updated with the easily parsed assessed values of the gifts in the 'fassessedvalue' column. The most expensive gift so far - a Rs. 140,000,000 watch - "Displayed at the MP House". It doesn't which house, or whether it is displayed on a wrist, or in a case.
Frg7-HbX0AA_3IQ


Another Rolex desired to be displayed at the PM House. Why would a recipient who does not live in the PM House 'desire' to display a Rolex in the PM House? Who in the world displays (expensive but quite common) watches in any country's PM House? "Oh, look, we got a Rolex gift?"
FrjtDBRXwAECcJ9


An innocent #toshakhana typo, that reduces the value of a set of gifts by 1/1000, from 847000 to 847.
FrmDX7EWIAEbY1d


This entry lists ONE watch but lists the prices for TWO, further increasing the confidence in the released toshakhana dataset.
Froy4vOXoAAwOQu


'One small packet' and 'One large packet' were magically assessed to be worth Rs. 4,000, and nobody asked how.
Fro4ANPWwAErukw


A Ladies' Handbag for a First Lady should not be assessed at Rs. 2,000 unless the era is the 1800s. The gift-giver must have been really cheap. Even the maid at my house has a bag worth more than 2,000.
Fro-Y5fXgAExFkI
AsSalam u Alaikum,

Kindly educate yourself and wake up people. Don't blindly follow elites(Imran, Generals, Shahbaz).

So much biased analysis but why nobody is talking about the reality. Or all of you are so biased and brainwashed by Imran and PTI media cell(PTI, Imran Khan, Fawad Chudhary, Imran Riaz Khan, Siddique Jan etc) that you do not want to talk about Imran Khan, the law breaker, the corrupt, the biggest Hypocrite. Atleast read the rules of "Tosha khana gift procedure 2018" in Imran's government before your biased analysis. Download the Policy of "Procedure for Acceptance and Disposal of Gifts 2018" from Cabinet official website. Link down below.
Procedure for Acceptance and Disposal of Gifts 2018

Now download(or you might have it already 😁) the Toshakhana record, "Details of Toshakhana Gifts from 2002 onwards till to date" from Cabinet official website. Link down below.
Details of Toshakhana Gifts from 2002 onwards till to date

Look at item no. 6 ii) in "Procedure for Acceptance and Disposal of Gifts 2018". Here is the excerpt. You can look for yourself.
(6) (ii) "Gifts valued above Rs.30,000/- may be allowed to be retained by the recipient on payment of 50% of the value exceeding the basic exemption of Rs.30,000/-. This exemption shall however not be available in case of antiques and gifts of "intrinsic historical value." All such gifts shall be properly catalogued and displayed at the prominent buildings owned by the Government. Different gift articles given by a single dignitary to a functionary at one occasion will be treated as single gift for the purpose of valuation."

Kindly note quoted words, "intrinsic historical value" item. What is an intrinsic historical value item? An item when copied(making duplicate copies of it), that copy cannot retain the value original item has, for example if you make a copy of Mona Lisa painting, that copy wouldn't reflect value of original painting. So Mona Lisa painting is of "intrinsic historical value". Or an item which is rare, unique, one of a kind or the only item. For example any rolex watch(let's say Rolex Day-Date line) is not rare. Rolex makes many Day-Date watches. Such an item is not "intrinsic historical value" item. But the Graff watch given by Crown Prince of Saudia, Muhammad bin Salman to Imran Khan is one of a kind. Only one watch was made on order. It has Khana Kaaba in it. It is rare and unique. The Whole set is rare and unique. It is made of gold and diamond. Thus the Graff watch and set is indeed "intrinsic historical value" item.
So when Imran Khan took Graff watch and the whole set, He broke the Tosha Khana law.

Imran Khan did 3 terrible things no one did in Tosha Khan.
1. He broke the law by taking "intrinsic historical value" item, the Graff set.
2. He took the set from Tosha Khana at meager price of Rs. 2m and sold it for Rs. 5m to make a profit of Rs. 3m. That is corruption. Imran already have admitted of selling the set for Rs. 5m. Or selling it for $2m if you take Dubai-based businessperson Umar Farooq disclosure to be true.
3. By selling a gift given by an important and prominent figure, Imran Khan disrespected the Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman. Its highly immoral, illicit and disrespectful to sell the gift for profit. Also intrinsic historical value item cannot be sold according to TK rules. Imran break the law second time by selling Graff set for profit. Corruption!

Also Imran Khan couldn't sell the Graff set according to Toshakhana rule. Kindly read Item (12). "Gifts, other than those in the nature of antiques or of intrinsic historical value, given to but not retained by the President, the Head of the Government and the Governors, will be sold in accordance with sub- para (10) above. The gifts in the nature of antiques or of intrinsic historical value shall be put on display in accordance with sub-para (8) above."
So Toshakhana and govt also can't sell the antique and the " intrinsic historical value" items. These items should be displayed at Govt buildings.

Zardari too broke the law by taking cars which one can't according to Toshakhana rules. Vehicles should be deposited to Central Pool of Cars of the Cabinet Division. Tosha khana rules, item (11). Imran Khan did deposit the Proton Car into Central Pool of Cars of the Cabinet Division. Nawaz Sharif did not retain the Mercedes car. How could he? He wasn't PM at that date 20-04-2008. Yousaf Raza Gillani was PM at the time. So Gillani took the Mercedes not Nawaz. That's another discrepancy in Toshakhana record.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom