The ongoing sugar scandal has once again revealed the deep entanglement between Pakistan’s economic policymaking and its political elite. What makes the latest revelations more potent is not just the staggering scale of corruption, but who is doing the exposing: Miftah Ismail, a former finance minister and a seasoned economist once affiliated with the ruling PML-N. In a stunning rebuke of his former party colleagues, Ismail has accused Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar of benefiting from the sugar cartelization crisis that continues to fleece millions of Pakistani consumers.
His allegations are not without weight. Multiple economic analyses and investigative reports have documented how a significant portion of Pakistan’s sugar production is controlled by political families—across party lines—including those in the ruling coalition. The overlap between political power and economic interest is no coincidence; it is a reflection of a political economy designed to protect elite privileges at the cost of the public good.
If the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) still wishes to retain a shred of public legitimacy, it must act impartially and initiate a thorough investigation into these claims. Silence or selective accountability only deepens public distrust in institutions that are already viewed as tools of political manipulation rather than instruments of justice.
But perhaps more striking than the scandal itself is the political isolation Miftah Ismail now faces. Once hailed as a pragmatic voice within the PML-N, Ismail’s emphasis on sound economics over populist optics made him a misfit in a party increasingly beholden to dynastic politics. In taking positions that challenged entrenched interests—including pushing for long-overdue tax reforms and rolling back unsustainable subsidies—he alienated not only vested industrial lobbies but also party stalwarts who preferred political expediency over economic prudence.
Eventually, this divergence cost him his position. The party replaced him with Ishaq Dar, a long-time confidant of the Sharif family whose approach to economic management has been consistently criticized for short-termism and lack of transparency. According to political observers, this move signaled a return to traditional patronage politics, where loyalty outweighs competence. In doing so, the PML-N arguably weakened its own credibility as a steward of economic reform.
Today, Ismail stands outside the fold of the PML-N. He has joined former Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi’s new political platform, Awam Pakistan Party—a nascent attempt to chart a more policy-driven, technocratic path. Whether this new alignment gains traction remains to be seen. But the political backlash he continues to face—including targeted character assassinations and recycled allegations—speaks volumes about how Pakistan treats those who dare speak truth to power.
One such accusation, recently revived by PML-N loyalists, alleged that Ismail awarded government contracts to his own company under the Benazir Nashonuma Programme. However, an in-depth investigation by senior journalist Fakhar Durrani has debunked these claims as baseless. The programme in question was launched under Dr. Sania Nishtar in 2019, long before Ismail held office in 2022. Moreover, official documents confirm that Ismail had recused himself from any dealings that could pose a conflict of interest. [Full report available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BrZ9dKKYDU]
This raises troubling questions: If there is no substance to the allegations, why are they being repeated? What are the motivations behind these political attacks? Analysts argue that the real issue is not corruption but control—who gets to define the economic narrative of the country. And Miftah Ismail, by refusing to toe the line, became an inconvenient voice.
There is a deeper malaise here. Pakistan has faced repeated balance-of-payments crises, stalled IMF programmes, and deteriorating investor confidence. Yet, instead of fostering a culture of competence, successive governments have chosen to silence reformists. In such an environment, even mild dissent is treated as betrayal, and genuine efforts at course correction are dismissed as disloyalty.
In fact, as some analysts suggest, the PML-N may have lost the confidence not just of the electorate but also of key institutional actors—including sections of the military establishment and international financial institutions—that once saw the party as a potential vehicle for reform. Its unwillingness to prioritize long-term economic planning over short-term political gains has exacted a cost, both at home and abroad.
The sugar scandal is not merely a story of market manipulation. It is a window into the moral and institutional decay that prevents Pakistan from reforming its economy in any meaningful way. It shows how the confluence of political power, economic self-interest, and institutional inertia can undermine even the most capable policymakers.
Miftah Ismail may now be outside the corridors of power, but his efforts to raise the alarm should not be dismissed. He has chosen a more difficult path—one that values truth over comfort, and policy over politics. In a country desperate for honest leadership, perhaps this principled defiance is the very thing we need more of.
Until those in power are held accountable—truly, not selectively—the cycle of economic decay and political cynicism will continue.
Read more:
Did Miftah Ismail award billion of rupees contract to his own company while he was finance minister?
Miftah denies conflict in WFP contract as minister doubles down on allegations
The Competition Assessment Study on the Sugar Sector in Pakistan
