Onus still on Sharifs to give money trail: SC
Counsel admits PM was chairman of Dubai-based offshore firm
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif waves as his son, Hussain Nawaz looks on. PHOTO: REUTERS / FILE
ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court has made it clear that the onus is still on Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his family to give evidence to establish that the luxury flats in an upscale London neighbourhood had been acquired through legal means.
A three-judge bench of the top court – headed by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan – also observed on Tuesday that the Sharif family could still give an explanation.
“The idea behind formation of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) was to give you another opportunity to provide documents regarding the acquisition of the London flats but this opportunity has been declined,” said Justice Ijaz ul Ahsen while responding to the arguments of Khawaja Haris, Premier Sharif’s counsel, against the JIT report.
Referring to the May 16, 2016 speech of the prime minister, the judge wondered that Sharif had given ‘documentary evidence’ of the London flats to the National Assembly speaker but didn’t provide it to the Supreme Court. “Give us an explanation as we all are hearing you,” he said while addressing Sharif’s attorney.
Panamagate Case: ‘Judges to give historic judgment’
Justice Ijaz remarked that the apex court had been asking for the money trail for more than a year but it hadn’t been provided yet.
He observed that Sharif and his family had been uncooperative with the JIT during interrogation. “It was their policy or approach to not say anything about their properties and let the JIT find whatever it could,” he remarked.
The judge wondered what else the probe panel was supposed to do when it had initially given the ruling family ample opportunity to say anything about their money trail. He also wondered over Sharif’s demeanour with the JIT as he had not given any reasonable reply to the questions posed by its members.
“In response to one of the questions, the prime minister said he had not seen the Qatari letters. This was a total denial and noncooperation,” he observed.
Regarding JIT’s recommendation of reopening of the Hudabiya Paper Mills case, Justice Ijaz said since investigation in the case was linked with the ongoing Panamagate case, the probe panel looked into the scam.
He also observed that the ‘source documents’ collected by the JIT against the Sharif family could be considered if they met the criteria of relevant laws.
JIT report: A wait with bated breath
Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, who is heading the three-judge bench, also observed that once the Sharif family admitted ownership of the London properties, then it was their duty to explain how they had acquired them.
He also observed that the apex court did not rely on the JIT report but on the material collected by the probe panel.
Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh, the third judge on the bench, observed that the ruling family gave a ‘service provide agreement’ of the offshore company neither to the Supreme Court nor to the JIT.
“Not a single scrap of paper is being given which could establish that Hussain Nawaz is the real owner of the London flats,” he said.
Justice Azmat also observed that the London apartments issue was not new as the matter had been lying with the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) for 17 years but it did not take any action.
“If the NAB had taken action, the apex court would not have entered this matter,” he observed. “The court will follow the law. The JIT recommendations are not binding on the court.”
Justice Azmat said if necessary the court might summon Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to explain his position.
Justice Ijaz, while referring to the apex court’s April 20 judgment, observed that after going through all material, they might refer the matter to the NAB or pass a declaration on the disqualification of the prime minister under Articles 184 (3), 187 and 190 of the Constitution.
Sharif’s counsel admitted that his client had been chairman of a Dubai-based offshore company exposed by the JIT during its investigation. Sharif had been issued a residence permit, called Iqama, by the UAE government for being the chairman of the board of Capital FZE.
“Hassan Nawaz was the owner of Capital FZE and Nawaz Sharif was only designated as chairman of the board of this offshore company but he did not receive any salary,” Haris told the bench in response to a query.
In his arguments, the counsel contended that the JIT had not confronted the prime minister regarding the documents of his employment in the firm.
Upon this, the bench told Haris that he might give an explanation before the court if the probe panel had not given an opportunity to Premier Sharif for clarifying his position in the matter.
The Supreme Court has made it clear that the onus is still on Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his family to give evidence to establish that the luxury flats in an upscale London neighbourhood had been acquired through legal means.
A three-judge bench of the top court – headed by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan – also observed on Tuesday that the Sharif family could still give an explanation.
“The idea behind formation of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) was to give you another opportunity to provide documents regarding the acquisition of the London flats but this opportunity has been declined,” said Justice Ijaz ul Ahsen while responding to the arguments of Khawaja Haris, Premier Sharif’s counsel, against the JIT report.
Referring to the May 16, 2016 speech of the prime minister, the judge wondered that Sharif had given ‘documentary evidence’ of the London flats to the National Assembly speaker but didn’t provide it to the Supreme Court. “Give us an explanation as we all are hearing you,” he said while addressing Sharif’s attorney.
Panamagate Case: ‘Judges to give historic judgment’
Justice Ijaz remarked that the apex court had been asking for the money trail for more than a year but it hadn’t been provided yet.
He observed that Sharif and his family had been uncooperative with the JIT during interrogation. “It was their policy or approach to not say anything about their properties and let the JIT find whatever it could,” he remarked.
The judge wondered what else the probe panel was supposed to do when it had initially given the ruling family ample opportunity to say anything about their money trail. He also wondered over Sharif’s demeanour with the JIT as he had not given any reasonable reply to the questions posed by its members.
“In response to one of the questions, the prime minister said he had not seen the Qatari letters. This was a total denial and noncooperation,” he observed.
Regarding JIT’s recommendation of reopening of the Hudabiya Paper Mills case, Justice Ijaz said since investigation in the case was linked with the ongoing Panamagate case, the probe panel looked into the scam.
He also observed that the ‘source documents’ collected by the JIT against the Sharif family could be considered if they met the criteria of relevant laws.
JIT report: A wait with bated breath
Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, who is heading the three-judge bench, also observed that once the Sharif family admitted ownership of the London properties, then it was their duty to explain how they had acquired them.
He also observed that the apex court did not rely on the JIT report but on the material collected by the probe panel.
Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh, the third judge on the bench, observed that the ruling family gave a ‘service provide agreement’ of the offshore company neither to the Supreme Court nor to the JIT.
“Not a single scrap of paper is being given which could establish that Hussain Nawaz is the real owner of the London flats,” he said.
Justice Azmat also observed that the London apartments issue was not new as the matter had been lying with the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) for 17 years but it did not take any action.
“If the NAB had taken action, the apex court would not have entered this matter,” he observed. “The court will follow the law. The JIT recommendations are not binding on the court.”
Justice Azmat said if necessary the court might summon Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to explain his position.
Justice Ijaz, while referring to the apex court’s April 20 judgment, observed that after going through all material, they might refer the matter to the NAB or pass a declaration on the disqualification of the prime minister under Articles 184 (3), 187 and 190 of the Constitution.
Sharif’s counsel admitted that his client had been chairman of a Dubai-based offshore company exposed by the JIT during its investigation. Sharif had been issued a residence permit, called Iqama, by the UAE government for being the chairman of the board of Capital FZE.
“Hassan Nawaz was the owner of Capital FZE and Nawaz Sharif was only designated as chairman of the board of this offshore company but he did not receive any salary,” Haris told the bench in response to a query.
In his arguments, the counsel contended that the JIT had not confronted the prime minister regarding the documents of his employment in the firm.
Upon this, the bench told Haris that he might give an explanation before the court if the probe panel had not given an opportunity to Premier Sharif for clarifying his position in the matter.