SC asks PM’s son to explain $1.9 million in earnings

Justice Asif Saeed Khosa observes there are two aspects of the case -- money laundering and tax evasion


Hasnat Malik January 18, 2017
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's son Hussain Nawaz. EXPRESS NEWS SCREENGRAB

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday directed Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s son Hussain Nawaz to explain how he earned $1.9 million which he “remitted to his father as a gift in 2011”.

Earlier, the prime minister’s counsel, Makhdoom Ali Khan, told the court that Nawaz had received a gift of $1.9 million from his son which was non-taxable. To this, Justice Asif Saeed Khosa said, “There are two aspects of the case -- first is tax evasion and the second is money laundering.”

Justice Khosa is heading a five-judge larger bench hearing a slew of petitions against the Sharif family in the Panamagate case.

In his remarks, Justice Khosa said it has been observed that people illegally sent money abroad and later some of it was remitted back in the country. He went on to say that now, the premier’s son has to provide the money trail of the amount which he remitted to his father.

SC questions if PM can be disqualified under Article 184

During the hearing, the SC judge also referred to former interior minister Rehman Malik’s investigation report on “Sharif family’s money laundering in 1990s and Finance Minister Ishaq Dar’s confession statement”.

The judge, however, observed that the report could not meet its logical conclusion as National Accountability Bureau (NAB) did not file an appeal against Lahore High Court’s order to quash the reference against the Sharif family in 2014. The apex court judge further said SC cannot re-investigate the matter under Article 184-3 of the Constitution.

Meanwhile, Justice Ijazul Ahsan remarked that the court wanted to see the account number of PM wherein he received money from his son. Justice Gulzar Ahmad also questioned why the gift money was not reflected in the prime minister’s wealth statement.

COMMENTS (13)

reader | 7 years ago | Reply @Shahid: The most sensible letter.
Shahid | 7 years ago | Reply Very good questions raised by the court. All receipts and copies of official transaction needs to be produced.
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ