New Delhi, Dec 28 (NationPress) The International Monetary Fund (IMF) Executive Board has controversially sanctioned an additional $1.29 billion in financial aid for Pakistan, even after the institution's own report underscored the rampant corruption in the debt-stricken nation, which hampers the repayment of these loans.

The IMF recently unveiled a comprehensive 186-page "Governance and Corruption Diagnostic Assessment" that depicts a bleak outlook on Pakistan’s institutional integrity.

According to Dr. Sakariya Kareem in the UK-based Asian Lite newspaper, "The timing raises eyebrows: the diagnostic was released just prior to the board meeting that authorized this latest disbursement. Effectively, the IMF has recognized that Pakistan’s governance issues are deep-rooted, yet it continues to extend loans without addressing the systemic corruption that fuels the crisis."

The report serves as a detailed institutional critique. The IMF concludes that corruption is "macro-critical" and ingrained within the very fabric of the state and economy. It influences who thrives, explains the sluggish growth, and clarifies why Pakistan repeatedly seeks assistance from the Fund.

The findings are alarming. In the fiscal year 2024–25, actual expenditures exceeded the approved budget by a staggering Rs 9.4 trillion, five times the previous year’s excess. These discrepancies were not initially debated in Parliament; they were legitimized post-factum through supplementary grants presented as a done deal. This pattern is not new. Ministries spend with the expectation of being rescued, the Finance Ministry accommodates them to mitigate political fallout, and Parliament rubber-stamps overruns that can surpass 10 percent of the original budget, as highlighted in the article.

The Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP), intended to direct funds towards growth-promoting infrastructure, has devolved into a repository of incomplete projects. The IMF notes a significant backlog of ongoing projects with a cumulative estimated cost of Rs 10.7 trillion. With annual allocations hovering around Rs 1.1 trillion, it would take nearly a decade to rectify the existing backlog, even without introducing new projects. Chronic delays, cost overruns, and poor execution are the inevitable outcomes of a system lacking transparent project selection or prioritization criteria.

Advocates for anticorruption insist that the IMF must honor its commitments by embedding anticorruption protocols into its lending processes. When corruption is identified as "macro-critical," as it is in Pakistan, the Fund should tie disbursements to verifiable governance improvements. Without such accountability, IMF support risks entrenching the very vulnerabilities it identifies, the article warns.

Ultimately, the IMF cannot rectify Pakistan’s internal issues; these responsibilities lie solely with Pakistan’s own institutions. If corruption continues to erode public resources, the benefits from IMF support will be fleeting. Financial assistance may boost reserves, but it will not restore public confidence or economic resilience. Each loan becomes a temporary fix rather than a solution for enduring growth, the article asserts.

The IMF’s conditions require nations to enhance fiscal transparency, which should have increased the chances of corrupt officials facing scrutiny. However, this does not seem to be the case in Pakistan, which continues to receive billions in IMF assistance while the Fund itself warns of the existential threats posed by corruption to its economic future.

Unless governance reforms transition from theoretical frameworks to actionable practices, IMF lending will persist as a revolving door for Pakistan, stabilizing crises without ever truly resolving them, the article concludes.