- Rs238.6bn assets cited in appeal.
- Threat investigation sought after FIR restoration.
- Dialogue urged to resolve disputes.
LONDON/DUBAI/ISLAMABAD: Bahria Town founder Malik Riaz Hussain has appealed to top figures in Pakistan to intervene over what he describes as the coercive seizure and auction of the company’s assets, The News reported.
He also alleged that a man accused of threatening him and his family with dire consequences and death remains at large despite the registration of an FIR and subsequent intervention by the High Court.
In a detailed appeal, Malik Riaz has drawn the attention of the top personalities to the treatment of Bahria Town and members of his family, while also warning that the continuing attachment, seizure and auction of the company’s properties could have far-reaching economic consequences.
The appeal alleges that Bahria assets are being subjected to forced dispossession and sale at exceptionally low and unrealistic prices despite multiple cases and judicial proceedings concerning the properties and related actions remaining pending before competent forums. The company said the attachment and sealing of its properties and the suspension of its business and development operations had created profound uncertainty among employees, investors and allottees.
It argued that the dispute should not be regarded simply as a grievance involving a private business because thousands of families had invested their savings in Bahria Town projects, while large numbers of employees, contractors, suppliers and businesses depended upon its activities.
The appeal highlights that Malik Riaz’s residence was subjected to surveillance and he received emails and messages containing threats to his life, and attempts were made to intimidate and terrorise his wife and children – the circumstances becoming sufficiently serious for Malik Riaz to leave Pakistan because of concerns for his own safety and that of his family.
The appeal states that a formal FIR was registered concerning the alleged threats but was subsequently cancelled. The High Court later intervened, restored the FIR and delivered a reasoned judgment in the matter, but no independent investigation has been held into the threats and surveillance against the individual against whom the FIR was registered, who has still not been arrested. The appeal calls for an independent and impartial investigation to establish the facts surrounding the threats and surveillance.
The document also makes serious allegations about the treatment of other members of Malik Riaz’s family. It claims that Malik Riaz Hussain’s children faced circumstances which, according to the family’s position, amounted to alleged abduction, unlawful detention and threats to their lives.
The appeal says Malik Riaz ultimately chose to leave Pakistan because he considered the protection of his family more important than his business interests and the organisation he had built over several decades. It further alleges that Malik Riaz’s brother was taken away and remained untraceable for several months. The document alleges that he was subsequently abandoned by a roadside while suffering from cancer, serious illness and extreme physical weakness.
The appeal focuses extensively on the financial impact of actions against Bahria Town. The company claims assets with an estimated minimum market value of approximately Rs238.6 billion have already been auctioned, taken into possession or are currently exposed to auction and disposal proceedings.
The appeal argues that previously published valuations of several strategic Bahria Town assets placed their value in the hundreds of millions or billions of rupees and alleges that core assets are now being auctioned at distress values or without complete transparency concerning valuations, bidding procedures and final consideration.
Bahria Town maintains that continued disposal of these assets could cause irreversible financial damage to the organisation and ultimately affect allottees, investors, employees and other parties whose interests are connected with its developments and could result in multiple rounds of legal proceedings, financial losses, compensation claims and greater uncertainty in Pakistan’s real-estate market.
The appeal has separately claimed that approximately Rs372 billion worth of development works are currently suspended – the affected projects include public infrastructure, essential utilities and residential development and are directly connected to thousands of employees, contractors, suppliers, investors, allottees and financial institutions.
The company argues that its existing properties should not be viewed simply as corporate assets because they represent resources from which development obligations to members of the public are supposed to be financed.
“If these very assets are seized and sold, from where will Bahria Town obtain the financial resources required to complete the outstanding Rs372 billion development works,” the appeal asks.
The appeal also refers to Bahria Town’s obligations before the Supreme Court of Pakistan and says the company remains under pressure to meet financial demands but cannot reasonably be expected to discharge substantial financial obligations while institutions simultaneously dispose of assets that constitute its principal sources of income and liquidity.
The representation also outlines what Bahria Town describes as Malik Riaz’s contribution to Pakistan’s economy and development over several decades as Malik Riaz devoted decades to construction, urban development, employment generation, welfare projects and investment and introduced modern organised residential developments on a large scale.
In the appeal, Malik Riaz has asked for outstanding disputes to be resolved through institutional dialogue rather than continued seizure and sale of assets.
He says a mutually acceptable settlement could preserve the properties and resources necessary for the orderly and transparent discharge of lawful obligations while protecting the interests of the state, investors, allottees, creditors and other stakeholders. Bahria Town stressed in the appeal that it was not seeking immunity or concession from the law.
