- By: Dr. Muhammad Tayyab Khan Singhanvi (Ph.D)
Transparency in state affairs is not merely a slogan; it is a continuous democratic obligation. Whenever details linked to the corridors of power are made public, they serve as a test of governance, accountability, and ethical responsibility. In Pakistan, the Toshakhana has long been more than a repository of official gifts; it has evolved into a powerful symbol of how authority is exercised, scrutinized, and judged. The release of the Toshakhana record for the October–December 2025 quarter by the Cabinet Division marks another significant moment in this ongoing national conversation.
According to the newly disclosed documents, several of the country’s most prominent political and state figures received official gifts during this three-month period. Among them are President Asif Ali Zardari, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, Chairman Pakistan Peoples Party Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, the First Lady, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi, Minister for Information Technology Shaza Fatima, Minister for Power Awais Leghari, Federal Minister for Economic Affairs Ahad Cheema, Speaker of the National Assembly Ayaz Sadiq, and Federal Minister for Information Ataullah Tarar. The list further extends to include senior advisers, special assistants, key officials attached to the Presidency, the Auditor General of Pakistan, ministers of state, senior bureaucrats, and heads of important departments.
What distinguishes this disclosure from many past controversies is the official confirmation that all recipients deposited the gifts they received into the Toshakhana. In a political culture where the Toshakhana has previously been associated with allegations, investigations, and bitter public debate, this assertion carries symbolic weight. At face value, it suggests compliance with the law and an acknowledgment that gifts received by virtue of public office are not personal possessions but state property held in trust.
The nature of the gifts themselves provides an interesting insight into diplomatic traditions and cultural expressions. The list includes models of Roza-e-Rasool ?, the Holy Kaaba, and Makkah Mukarramah items whose value lies less in material worth and more in spiritual and symbolic significance. Alongside these are paintings, perfumes, shields, carpets, tea sets, swords, daggers, vases, wristwatches, decorative pieces, Saudi coffee, books, royal caps, commemorative souvenirs, table clocks, a model of the Metro Bus, coffee pots, shirts, musical instruments, blankets, scarves, ties, and various other items. Together, these gifts reflect a blend of tradition, diplomacy, culture, and ceremonial courtesy that accompanies official interactions at the highest levels.
However, transparency is measured not only by what is revealed, but also by what is omitted. A notable difference between this disclosure and the record of the previous financial year’s last half (January–June 2025) is the absence of the names of those who presented the gifts. In earlier records, both domestic and foreign donors were clearly identified. The omission of this column in the current list has raised questions about consistency in disclosure. While the publication of recipients and items is a step forward, the lack of information about donors leaves the record incomplete and invites debate about whether transparency should be selective or comprehensive.
The Cabinet Division has also clarified that the process of valuation of these gifts is currently under way. This stage is crucial, as the assessed value determines whether a recipient may legally retain a gift by paying the prescribed amount or whether it must remain permanently in the state’s possession. Historically, disputes over valuation have proven to be the most contentious aspect of Toshakhana affairs, often fueling political accusations and legal battles. In this context, the credibility and neutrality of the valuation process will be closely watched, as it will either reinforce public trust or revive old suspicions.
Making Toshakhana records public is more than an administrative exercise; it is a statement about governance priorities. It signals an intention at least in principle to move away from secrecy and toward openness. Yet transparency is not achieved through isolated disclosures alone. It requires consistency, equal application of rules, and the insulation of accountability mechanisms from political expediency. If records are released irregularly, or with varying levels of detail, the effort risks appearing symbolic rather than substantive.
The broader significance of this disclosure lies in what it represents for democratic norms. Public office carries privileges, but it also imposes moral and legal obligations. Gifts received in an official capacity are not mere tokens of goodwill; they are closely tied to the authority of the state. How they are handled reflects the ethical standards of those in power. The October–December 2025 Toshakhana record offers a glimpse of compliance and order, but it is only one frame in a much larger picture.
Ultimately, the real question is not simply who received which gift, but whether the principle of public trust is being upheld in letter and spirit. If the publication of Toshakhana records becomes a routine practice, governed by clear rules and full disclosure, it could transform a historically controversial institution into an example of accountable governance. If not, the Toshakhana may once again become a symbol of political discord rather than public responsibility. The direction chosen will determine whether this latest disclosure is remembered as a genuine step toward transparency or merely a temporary pause in a long-running debate.