Nawaz Sharif files another review petition against Panamagate verdict

Former PM argues not declaring the accrued salary can be termed as a mistake, but not fraud

Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif filed another review petition in the Supreme Court on Saturday against the top court's July 28 Panamagate verdict which had disqualified him.

In the petition, Nawaz stated that the court had rejected the Sharif family's reservations by terming them premature. He added that the disqualification could have only been ordered on the basis of preponderant evidence. The court gave the verdict over a matter which was not even mentioned in the application, he argued.



Hearing a slew of petitions filed after the emergence of the Panama Papers, the top court’s five-judge bench had disqualified Nawaz Sharif and directed the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to file references against the former PM and his children in an accountability court. The court had also ordered that one of the members the bench would also oversee the proceedings of the court.

The deposed prime minister in his petition contended that according to the income tax law, salary was defined as accrued payable.

Not declaring the accrued salary can be termed as a mistake but not fraud, the former PM argued.



The former premier was disqualified for failing to declare unclaimed wages earned as an executive of a Dubai-based company owned by his son in the assets statement he filed alongside his nomination papers for NA-120 in 2013 general election.

Nawaz’s earlier application filed on August 15 had provided 19 reasons which, he argued, provided proof for why he should not have been disqualified, and that merit the SC recalling its July 28 verdict against him. He has also pleaded that the court suspend the operation of the judgement until the final decision on his review petition.

“If, during the pendency of the review petition, the operation of the final order of the court dated 28.07.2017 is not suspended, the steps taken in pursuance thereof, and its implementation as such, shall be seriously detrimental to [Sharif’s] fundamental right to a fair trial, besides working to his prejudice by seriously compromising the constitutional guarantees and mandate of articles 4, 25, and 175 of the Constitution…and rendering his review petition infructuous, and, as such, shall cause [Sharif] irreparable loss,” read the application.