PM's children given until Nov 7 to submit replies PHOTO: FILE
The Panama Papers on April 3 revealed that Premier Nawaz Sharif’s three children – Maryam, Hasan and Hussain – were among hundreds of powerful people who had stashed away money in offshore companies.
Heading a five-judge larger bench, Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali observed that the court wanted to decide the Panama leaks case expeditiously. He said a judicial commission to probe the mega financial scandal will comprise one member, who will be a serving judge of the apex court and will have all powers of the top court.
“We do not want to give any impression that the proceedings of this case are being dragged. The court will proceed in this matter without any further delay,” he said.
The chief justice also urged the media to avoid sensationalism, adding that media sensation in the Panama leaks issue might damage not only one institution but also public at large.
He also made it clear that the apex court was not bound to accept terms of reference (ToRs) of any petitioner or respondent. “This is for the court to regulate the proceedings.”
On November 1, the bench asked both the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz to submit their respective ToRs as it observed that in case of continued disagreement between the parties, the court could develop its ToRs.
When the Supreme Court on Thursday took up the different petitions seeking a probe into the Panamagate scandal, the courtroom was jam-packed. Even PTI chief Imran Khan and his party’s senior leaders were there to witness the proceedings.
Earlier, Sharif’s counsel Salman Aslam Butt submitted replies on behalf of the premier, his son-in law Captain (retd) Muhammad Safdar and Finance Minister Ishaq Dar.
However, he told the bench that the replies could not be furnished on behalf of Maryam Nawaz Sharif, Hussain Nawaz Sharif and Hassan Nawaz Sharif as two of them were outside the country and that he needed to discuss the case with them.
The bench expressed anger over the counsel and asked why he did not submit a reply on behalf of Maryam, who is in Pakistan. Justice Azmat Saeed, a member of the bench, observed that her reply in this matter would be very crucial.
Another member of the bench, Justice Asif Saeed Khosa observed that by law, if an individual fails to submit a reply in any matter, it is to be considered that he or she is accepting the allegations.
Later, the counsel assured the bench that replies will be submitted till Monday. The bench in its order also made it clear that no further request for adjournment will be entertained.
Nawaz denies owning offshore entities
In his reply, Sharif told the bench that he is neither the owner of any offshore entities nor of any offshore properties, including flats in Landon. He also submitted that neither his name had appeared in the Panama Papers nor any accusations had been levelled against him in the said papers.
Sharif said he is a regular taxpayer and his entire income, assets and liabilities are duly declared in the tax returns as well as nomination forms for the elections 2013. Nawaz told the SC that none of his children are his dependent nor any of them has been declared his dependent.
“The answering respondent fulfills the requirements of Articles 62 -63 of the Constitution as well as is fully compliant with his obligation of declaration of assets and liabilities under the provision of the Representation of People Act 1976 and other applicable laws.”
Regarding his statement in the National Assembly, Sharif said he neither stated or claimed that he is the owner of the properties or had any connection with business concerns of his other independent family members. “Any inference being drawn to the contrary is especially denied,” he said.
In his reply, Sharif’s son-in-law, Captain Safdar, said he had duly disclosed the assets and liabilities of his wife, Maryam Nawaz, in his nomination papers by enclosing the tax returns of his wife.
“Furthermore, as confirmed to the answering respondent by respondent’s wife, respondent’s wife is neither the owner of the assets alleged in the petition as not disclosed nor owes any liabilities as alleged. Respondent’s wife is a regular tax payer and duly submits her tax returns with the tax department wherein all the assets and liabilities standing in her name have been duly disclosed.”
Finance Minister Ishaq Dar, in his reply, said the petitioner had sought his disqualification solely on the basis of a purported confessional statement.
“The purported statement was illegally and forcefully recorded after the military coup of Pervez Musharaf in the year 1999. There is neither any allegation of mis-declaration of any asset nor any link whatsoever with any Panama offshore company levelled against the answering respondent,” he said.
The PTI’s ToRs
In its ToRs, the PTI demanded that the judicial commission first investigate the PM Sharif and his family members for having offshore companies and then proceed to inquire into the properties and affairs of other respondents. It said the commission should also see whether any law has been infringed. If so, then determine the responsibility for such infringement.
The PTI’s ToRs suggested to appoint a committee of experts in international forensic audit to carry out an exhaustive investigation and audit into the offshore companies and their accounts owned by the PM and his family.
It also asked if any Pakistani staying abroad under agreements between the government of Pakistan and another sovereign state was not a state guest in the country on behalf of Pakistan. “Whether any property, gifts or amounts received by him during that period did not belong to Pakistan?” it asked.
“The PM and his family members shall execute mandatory authorisations by irrevocable general power of attorney empowering the experts committee to lift all corporate veils, access all bank accounts, offshore companies and their accounts.
“In case the PM and his family members omit to extend fullest cooperation to the committee or if they are unable to rebut the presumption that the assets were not acquired through legitimate income then the commission shall direct them to forthwith liquidate and bring those assets and funds to Pakistan where the state shall forfeit them,” it said.
PTI, JI pleas competent: SC
Earlier, the bench asked the Sharifs’ counsel and Attorney General for Pakistan Ashtar Ausaf Ali whether they had any objection over the court’s proceedings in this matter under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution.
In their reply, they candidly stated that in such like cases, jurisdiction of this court under Article 184 (3) could be validly invoked and exercised.
After their response, the bench passed a short order, wherein 11 previous judgments of the top court were cited to establish its jurisdiction in Panama leaks matter.
“Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case vis-à-vis controversy, raised in these petitions, the office objections as regards maintainability of these petitions are overruled. Accordingly, it is held that these petitions are competent,” said the order.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 4th, 2016.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ