Beneficiary of trust property cannot become owner: SC

Says trust has legal ownership of property, notes discrepancies in Tareen’s pleadings and documents

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court observed on Wednesday that a beneficiary of any property cannot become its owner.

The court, hearing Jahangir Tareen’s disqualification case, has also asked the counsel for Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader Hanif Abbasi to explain under what law was it mandatory for the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf leader to disclose the assets of a trust in his nomination papers.

The three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Mian Saqib Nisar, resumed hearing of Hanif Abbasi’s petition seeking the disqualification of Tareen, as well as Imran Khan, as members of the National Assembly over allegations of concealing their sources of income.

“Tell us how the trust’s assets belong to [Tareen],” the chief justice asked Azid Nafees, counsel for Hanif Abbasi.

The CJP, while referring to the Panama Papers verdict, observed that the main issue in the case was the source of money used to purchase the UK properties. “The main issue was where the money came from and how it was transferred,” said the chief justice.

According to the trust deed presented in court, Tareen is a discretionary lifetime beneficiary of the UK properties.



The bench observed that avoidance of tax through legal means is not considered dishonesty. On this, the defence counsel of PML-N said that the court, while deciding the issue of honesty, should examine the conduct of the candidate. “How a person who was involved in insider trading act as a finance minister,” Nafees asked.  Upon this, the bench noted his concern by saying that he raised a significant point.

The counsel also pointed out that Tareen, in his earlier pleading, had stated that his children are the beneficial owners of the UK property, but it has been revealed in the trust deed that he is the beneficial owner. The bench also noted that there is a discrepancy between the trust deed and his earlier pleadings regarding beneficial ownership.

On the matter of disqualification, Justice Umar Bandial observed that two judges in the Panama case had observed that there must be a violation of law for disqualification of an MNA under Article 62 (1) of the Constitution.

He also said that the review petition judgment has drawn a distinction between disqualification under election laws and Article 62 (1) of the Constitution.

Later, Sikandar Bashir Mohmand, counsel for Tareen, stated that the trustee, which is a bank, is the absolute beneficial owner of the property, adding that it is not his client’s asset to disclose.

Justice Bandial observed that under the trust deed, Tareen has access to income generated by the trust from the property.

However, the counsel said that there is no evidence that his client got any income from the property.

The bench then pointed out that in the Panama judgment, Nawaz Sharif was disqualified because of unwithdrawn salary that was undeclared in his nomination papers. The AGP will present arguments in the Tareen case today (Thursday).