IT is a good, sensible and democratic idea and it is one that the government ought to consider seriously. On Sunday, PTI supremo Imran Khan challenged Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to a parliamentary debate. While Mr Khan gave no specifics, presumably the debate would centre on the Sharif family-related revelations in the Panama Papers and questions about the family’s wealth and assets. The PML-N is likely to be dismissive of the demand. The party’s disdain for its biggest political rival is apparent; the prime ministerial circle is likely to argue that the matter is sub judice; and Mr Sharif himself has shown little interest in the proceedings of parliament throughout his third term, even when political waters have been unthreatening. But such likely reluctance should not obscure the fact that an important, democracy-strengthening debate needs to be held in parliament.

Set aside the specific matters being heard by the Supreme Court. The Panama Papers and the subsequent admissions by the Sharifs have raised serious matters of conflict of interest. The separation, if any, between the seemingly vast business empire of the Sharifs and the public roles of Prime Minister Sharif and Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif is a dark area. Consider the immense scrutiny President Donald Trump is under in the US and the several steps the Trump business empire has had to take to put a distance between its operations and the office of the president. The Sharif family, meanwhile, has vast business operations both inside and outside Pakistan — and there is no known step that has been taken to ensure that political favours are not being used to keep the businesses afloat and profitable. How have the prime minister, the Punjab chief minister and indeed many wealthy businessmen in the cabinet and government separated their personal business interests from government decision-making and policymaking? Surely, as the democratic transition continues, it is necessary for more rules and greater oversight of potential conflicts of interest between elected leaders and their private business interests. A parliamentary debate would be the right starting point.

There is also an external dimension, made public by the Sharifs themselves. The production of a letter by a Qatari prince supporting the Sharif position on the London flats has only a more riveting disclosure among many problematic revelations. It is now clear that the Sharifs have direct business ties with leaders of several Gulf and Middle Eastern states. But those states also happen to be the ones with which Pakistan has multi-billion dollar trade and human capital ties. Is the collective national interest being offset by private interests of the country’s leadership? These are grave matters with no easy solutions. But a parliamentary debate could put the country on a path to untangling some of the apparent conflicts of interest. Imran Khan is right — go to parliament and address a host of concerns, prime minister.

Published in Dawn January 24th, 2017