New CJP’s first move: Panamagate bench gets makeover

Justice Mian Saqib Nisar not part of the bench that will start hearings on Jan 4

ISLAMABAD: Immediately after donning the robe of the country’s top judge on Saturday, Justice Mian Saqib Nisar formed a five-judge larger bench that will hear the Panamagate case afresh from January 4.

Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, an outspoken judge who specialises in criminal law, will head the bench that also comprises Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh and Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan. Significantly, the new chief justice decided to stay away from the case which involves the ruling Sharif family.



On his first day in office, Chief Justice Nisar also notified another five-judge bench to hear a case against the Lahore Orange Line metro train, the Punjab government’s flagship mass transit project. The chief justice avoided sitting on this bench too since it involves the PML-N. Justice Amir Hani Muslim will head the bench which will take up the case from tomorrow (Monday).

The vice chairman of the Pakistan Bar Council, Farogh Naseem, who is in the United States these days, appreciated the chief justice’s decision, saying that a ‘very independent bench’ comprising senior judges has been constituted to hear the Panamagate case.

In November, the Supreme Court had taken up a slew of petitions seeking Premier Sharif’s disqualification in the wake of revelations made in the Panama Papers that three scions of the Sharif family had stashed money in offshore companies.

Three of these petitions were filed by PTI Chairman Imran Khan, Jamaat-e- Islami Ameer Sirajul Haq and Awami Muslim League chief Sheikh Rashid Ahmad under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution.



Chief Justice Nisar’s predecessor Anwar Zaheer Jamali headed the previous bench, which had conducted 10 hearings before adjourning the case till the first week of January. The bench was dissolved as Justice Jamali retired on December 30.

Interestingly, Justice Amir Hani Muslim, who was a member of the Justice Jamali-led bench, has not been included in the new bench. Sources say Justice Hani himself didn’t wish to be part of the bench because he is retiring in March.

On the new bench, Justice Ejaz belongs to Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, Justice Gulzar hails from Sindh, while Justice Khosa, Justice Azmat and Justice Ijaz are from Punjab. The last three judges were also part of the previous bench. Justice Gulzar and Justice Ijaz have expertise in corporate and banking laws; Justice Azmat specialises in money-laundering issues, while Justice Ejaz has a specialty in civil cases.

PTI spokesperson Fawad Chaudhry reposed full confidence in the new bench which, his party expected, would decide the case in the same month [January].

On the other hand, the legal minds of the ruling party believe since the new bench will hear the case afresh they might raise the issue of maintainability of the petitions. Interestingly, the previous bench had settled this issue by issuing a short order.

Akram Sheikh, the counsel for the children of Premier Sharif, said his client has not raised technical objections over the petitions but the “issue of maintainability has yet to be decided”.

“I’m representing private individuals and on their behalf, I will raise questions over the locus standi of the petitioners as well as maintainability of their petitions before the new bench,” Sheikh told The Express Tribune. However, he said he has complete trust in the new bench.

Contrary to Advocate Sheikh’s argument, the PTI legal team believes the issue of maintainability has already been settled by the previous bench in its November 3 order, which says none from the respondents’ side has raised any objection as to the exercise of jurisdiction by this court under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution.

Panamagate case: Sharif family continues to spring surprises

“Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case vis-à-vis the controversy raised in these petitions, the office objections as regards maintainability of these petitions are overruled. Accordingly, it is held that these petitions are maintainable,” reads the order.

The Sharif family is already upset with the prime minister’s counsel Salman Aslam Butt who, while arguing before the previous bench, claimed that a statement his client had made in parliament about money trail for property abroad was a ‘political’ statement.

Legal experts say the previous bench was not interested in giving a judgment on the point of ‘Sadiq and Ameen (truthful and trustworthy)’ as well as dependency.

Similarly, the court had not heard arguments in the matter related to tax evasion. The bench was mainly focusing on money trail through which the Sharif family had acquired luxury flats in a posh London neighbourhood.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 1^st, 2017.