LONDON (The Sunday Times/ National Times): Three Pakistani-origin British members of parliament have come under growing criticism after appearing at promotional events for a Dubai property development linked to Pakistani real estate tycoon Malik Riaz Hussain and his son, Ali Riaz Malik — two figures whose names have long remained associated with controversy, political influence, and legal scrutiny in both Pakistan and the United Kingdom.
According to an investigation by The Sunday Times, Labour MPs Naz Shah and Afzal Khan, along with independent MP Ayoub Khan, attended a series of roadshow events in June 2024 aimed at promoting the Waada project, a luxury real estate venture planned for southern Dubai. The development, marketed as a major high-end destination, is expected to include luxury apartments, mansions, a five-star hotel and even a replica of the Eiffel Tower. However, beyond its glossy presentation and commercial appeal, the project has now become the centre of serious political and ethical questions because of the individuals behind it and the public legitimacy lent to it by elected British lawmakers.
The controversy is particularly significant because Malik Riaz and his son are not ordinary businessmen. For years, both have remained embroiled in allegations, legal disputes and corruption-linked controversies that have repeatedly placed their business empire under the spotlight. Their names became internationally known after a high-profile investigation by the United Kingdom’s National Crime Agency (NCA), which in 2019 resulted in the family agreeing to forfeit £190 million under an unexplained wealth investigation. That settlement also included proceeds from the sale of a £50 million London mansion. Although the matter was treated as a civil settlement rather than a criminal conviction, the scale of the case and the institutions involved ensured that it carried major reputational consequences on both sides.
The money repatriated to Pakistan later became politically explosive, eventually forming part of the corruption case against former prime minister Imran Khan and his wife. That case centred around allegations that funds returned by British authorities were used to settle liabilities connected to Bahria Town in exchange for benefits allegedly extended to the former ruling family. While the legal and political dimensions of that matter remain fiercely contested in Pakistan, what remains beyond dispute is that the Malik Riaz empire has for years occupied a deeply controversial space at the intersection of business, politics, land development and elite influence.
The issue has become even more sensitive because both Malik Riaz and Ali Riaz Malik are barred from entering the United Kingdom. In November 2021, the UK Court of Appeal upheld the Home Office’s decision to exclude the father and son from Britain, with the court affirming that their presence in the country was not considered conducive to the public good. That legal backdrop has now intensified scrutiny over why serving British parliamentarians would choose to appear at events designed to market and uplift a business venture associated with such heavily disputed figures. Critics argue that regardless of whether the MPs were formally endorsing the project or simply attending as guests, their presence handed the development a level of political respectability and public credibility that money alone cannot buy.
According to the report, the MPs appeared at multiple events spread over eight days in June last year. Labour MP Afzal Khan, who represents Manchester Rusholme and sits on parliament’s joint human rights committee, reportedly attended the launch event in Stockport on June 14, where he praised the developers’ decades of experience and was seen participating in ceremonial proceedings. Independent MP Ayoub Khan attended a Birmingham event the following day as a guest of honour and reportedly spoke positively about the track record of the people behind the scheme, referencing Bahria Town’s background. Naz Shah, Labour MP for Bradford West, later attended the gala finale in Mayfair, where she described the company as having a successful reputation in Pakistan.
What has made the controversy more damaging is the fact that these appearances were not politically neutral in effect. The MPs’ participation was later used in promotional videos, advertising material and event publicity for the Dubai project — effectively transforming their attendance into marketing capital for a venture linked to one of Pakistan’s most controversial business empires. In practical terms, critics say, elected British officials became part of a public relations exercise that helped soften the image of figures facing intense legal and political heat elsewhere. That, they argue, is not merely a matter of optics but a serious question of judgment, responsibility and political ethics.
The backlash has also reignited a broader concern often raised in both Britain and Pakistan: how wealthy and controversial business figures continue to seek legitimacy not only through wealth and luxury branding, but through visible association with politicians, public office-holders and institutions of democratic trust. In such cases, critics argue, appearances matter enormously. A handshake, a stage appearance or a ceremonial endorsement can be used to project credibility, mute controversy and attract overseas investors who may not fully understand the legal or political baggage attached to the individuals involved.
The Pakistani government has, in recent years, taken an increasingly hard line on several matters linked to Bahria Town and its senior executives. Arrest warrants have reportedly been issued for key company-linked figures, while public warnings have also surfaced cautioning potential investors about projects allegedly tied to disputed financial flows and legal complications. Against that backdrop, the involvement of British MPs in events promoting a luxury overseas venture has only deepened concerns that political visibility is being used as a shield against public suspicion and legal scrutiny.
All three parliamentarians have attempted to distance themselves from the controversy. Ayoub Khan reportedly said he had no prior knowledge of any historical impropriety and had written to the company demanding that all references to him be removed from promotional material. Naz Shah’s office said she attends many community events connected to her constituents and did not take part in the event in any formal promotional capacity. Afzal Khan similarly stated that he had only attended briefly after being invited by a local businessman rather than the organisers and denied endorsing the project.
Yet for many observers, those explanations are unlikely to fully settle the issue. The central question remains not simply whether the MPs intended to endorse the venture, but whether public officials entrusted with democratic legitimacy exercised proper judgment before associating themselves with a project linked to figures carrying such a heavy cloud of legal, political and reputational controversy. In the world of elite business and international real estate, symbolic endorsement is often just as valuable as formal partnership. And that is precisely why this episode has triggered such a sharp response.
At its core, the controversy is about more than one Dubai development or one set of roadshow appearances. It speaks to a wider pattern in which wealth, influence and political access continue to overlap in ways that blur the line between business promotion and reputational laundering. For critics, the real scandal is not merely that controversial figures continue to build billion-dollar ventures abroad — it is that elected lawmakers can still be drawn, knowingly or unknowingly, into helping polish the image of power when serious questions remain unresolved.
