NAB reference: Counsel questions evidential documents

Prosecution team says evidence admissible under Electronic Transactions Ordinance

ISLAMABAD: Finance Minister Ishaq Dar’s counsel on Thursday drew the attention of the accountability court hearing an assets reference against him towards alleged tampering with a document related to his account in the National Investment Trust (NIT).

While cross-examining a witness from the NIT, Shahid Aziz, defence counsel Khawaja Haris told the court that the original document was different from the photocopy submitted by him.

The alleged tampering in the form of overwriting and stamps of two different cities – Lahore and Islamabad – was found on Dar’s investment form submitted to the NIT in 2015. The court was hearing the reference filed by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) against Dar for owning assets disproportionate to his known sources of income.



In his statement, the witness said that NIT kept the original form and a carbon copy was sent to the trust’s Karachi office. He said the photocopy submitted before the court on Wednesday had been sent to him by the Karachi office. After receiving the original as well as photocopies of the documents from the Karachi office, he had sent the copies to the NAB authorities in Lahore, he said.

The court agreed with defence counsel’s argument that the original and photocopy were different.

“If a carbon copy is made from the original document then why the photocopy is different from the original?” asked Haris. The witness replied that it was a minor mistake and there was no change in the amount mentioned on the form. Haris, however, termed it a “fraud”.

In reply to a question, the witness admitted that there was no irregularity or illegality in payment of dividends and their re-investment. On redemption of money, Capital Gain Tax was deducted and no undue payment had been made to Dar, he said. He added that the amount for the purchase of NIT units had been received through the proper banking channel by crossed cheques. Aziz also admitted that none of the documents had been prepared, filled and signed by him.

At one point, he said NAB had asked him through a letter to submit the evidence, but later said he had inferred this from discussions in his department and finally stated that he had also been informed by telephone on a landline number in his office.

Earlier, a senior vice president of Al Baraka Bank in Gulberg, Lahore, Tariq Javed, recorded his statement which was repeatedly interrupted because of objections related to some missing, misplaced or incorrectly numbered pages and some copies submitted along with the original documents.



Haris raised several objections, saying the evidence was not admissible because the documents, consisting of nine seizure memos regarding a personal account of Dar’s wife and several company accounts, were not produced as required under the banking and other relevant laws. He added that the documents had not been submitted by the person who had certified them.

The NAB prosecution team, however, said the documents were admissible as the Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002 had overriding effect on laws and the evidence produced before the court was in line with it.

The NAB team’s interruption in an attempt to assist Javed irked the judge and, at one point, he asked a prosecutor to either begin recording his testimony instead of the witness or let him state what he had to say.

During cross-examination, Javed admitted that there was no account of Dar and his children in the bank. When asked as to who had asked him to provide evidence in the case, he revealed that he had received an email which he couldn’t present before the court on Wednesday.

Haris said he would conclude the cross-examination after the witness brought the record of the email proving that he had been instructed to provide the documents to NAB.

Ministers of State Tariq Fazal Chaudhry and Anusha Rehman, Privatisation Minister Danial Aziz and the Prime Minister’s Special Assistant on Law Barrister Zafarullah Khan remained in the courtroom with Dar throughout the day’s proceedings.

NAB has alleged that “the accused has acquired assets and pecuniary interests/resources in his own name and/or in the name of his dependants of an approximate amount of Rs831.678 million as per investigation conducted so far”.

Following the hearing, the court summoned more witnesses and adjourned the case till October 16.