Judicial system needs to be overhauled: Sharif

Star witness continues recording statement in Avenfield reference

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) President Nawaz Sharif on Thursday said the entire judicial system needed to be overhauled “because justice being delayed or denied are among the major public issues”.

The ousted prime minister said, “The country’s judicial system requires reforms and the PML-N’s manifesto for the next general elections will include a complete system that will ensure swift and inexpensive justice for the public.”

“Delayed justice or not getting justice at all is a major issue of Pakistan,” Sharif said, adding his party through the ‘justice movement’ would introduce a comprehensive judicial system.

He was sharing his views with reporters covering his trial at an accountability court in the capital.



Sharif said extensive sessions were held for bringing improvements in the judicial system when he became prime minister in 2013 and “this will be a major part of the party’s manifesto in the 2018 elections”.

The three-time prime minister said his case is unique in the history of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) as unlike other political persons’ cases, there was not a single allegation of receiving kickbacks or committing corruption in any project while he held key posts.

Commenting on NAB’s references against him and his family members, Sharif said that the cases have not been made on the basis of corruption, but of assets, and they have been asking how a factory was established in the 1970s – before he even entered politics.

Referring to the allegations of horse-trading during the Senate election and election of the chairman and deputy chairman, Sharif said the entire country witnessed what happened and “someone should explain who gave Imran Khan and Asif Zardari the address of Sanjrani’s house”, adding that the new Senate chairman has no political stature or valuable contributions.

“Who told [residents of] Bani Gala and Bilawal House about Sanjrani’s house?” he asked, adding people were thinking about what happened in the Senate the other day. He said that Raza Rabbani and Raja Zafarul Haq were the best candidates for the chairman’s slot.

He continued that everyone reached Sanjrani’s house believing that there was a person named ‘Sadiq’ and he should be voted for in the Senate election.

“There is a dire need to investigate the accusations of Pashtoonkhwa Milli Awami Party’s chief Mehmood Khan Achakzai in connection with the change of government in Balochistan,” he said, adding, “I am not in favour of conflict and only desires that the country is run according to the law and the Constitution.” “Is it wrong to want this?” he asked.

Sharif concluded the discussion with a couplet of renowned poet Mirza Ghalib – “Zindagi apni jab is shakal se guzri Ghalib, hum bhi kya yaad karenge ki Khuda rakhte the” [When our life has passed so wretchedly, Ghalib, Will we remember that the Lord cared for us?].

Zia resumes statement

Meanwhile, the star prosecution witness Wajid Zia – who headed the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) that probed the Panama Papers scandal on the Supreme Court’s directions – continued recording his statement in the Avenfield Apartments reference against Sharif, Maryam Nawaz and Captain (retd) Safdar.

Before the statement, defence counsel Amjad Pervaiz and NAB’s prosecutor Sardar Muzzafar Abbasi argued over what Zia can exhibit as evidence from the JIT report.



In the previous hearing, Pervaiz had challenged the admissibility of the entire JIT report into the Panama papers scandal as evidence.

In his arguments, Pervaiz said that the Supreme Court’s July 28, 2017 judgment directed NAB to prepare and file references on the basis of the ‘material’ collected by the JIT, but NAB, in its wisdom, attached the whole JIT report along with the references and now wanted to exhibit it evidence through Zia.

The counsel reiterated that Zia, being a star witness, could not produce the JIT report as evidence because it was merely information and therefore inadmissible in court, adding that superior courts have held the same in several judgments.

He said the defence would not object to the material collected or authored by the witness but the rest, including opinions, summaries of investigation and statements of the Sharif family, could not be made a part of the evidence.

While defining ‘heresy’, Pervez said, “If a person tells something to an investigation officer (IO), the IO cannot tell the court that someone told him this and it should be added into evidence,” adding that the evidence should pass the requirements set in the law of evidence.

In his arguments, Abbasi said the JIT report is a material document, it falls within the purview of evidence, the top court of Pakistan has relied upon it, it’s very important for NAB and the accused have not earlier challenged the report at any forum.

He added that the JIT was like a commission and it has now become a public document, adding that the JIT answered the specific questions framed by the Supreme Court. Following the arguments, the court reserved verdict and took a 15-minute break before resuming the hearing.

Accountability Court Judge Muhammad Bashir said that he would decide the matter later on and Zia cannot exhibit summaries, opinions, or conclusions from the JIT report or statements of accused persons as evidence while recording his statement.

The judge said that the relevant part of the report can be exhibited subject to objections of defence. Subsequently, he directed Zia to produce relevant material and not the narration of the events.

Zia requested the court to allow him to record statement as he deemed fit since he has been looking into the matter since the beginning and matching his understanding with the prosecution team would take a lot of time.

Judge Bashir, however, said that the prosecution leads the witness; otherwise, the witness can go on for days. Zia than referred to the CMAs submitted by Sharif family in the Supreme Court and the material he collected while preparing JIT report.

Qatari letters

Zia presented former Qatari Prince Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber al Thani’s letter pertaining to an investment of AED12 million made by Mian Sharif with Fahad Al Thani.

Though the defence counsel raised objections on almost all the documents, Zia presented but did not raise any objections to the admissibility of the Qatari letter as evidence.

In July 2017, JIT had declared the Sharif family’s prime and final defence – the letters from Qatari Prince as “totally a myth rather than a reality”, adding that the ruling family had never invested 12 million dirhams in the Qatari royal family’s business.

In his response to JIT’s letters, Thani had owned his letters saying “I hereby confirm and verify that the two letters dated November 5, 2016 and December 22, 2016, respectively...were signed by me and I am pleased to reconfirm the contents thereof.”

In his letter, Thani had stated that “an aggregate sum of around AED12 million was contributed by Sharif, originating from the sale of a business in Dubai, UAE,” in the real estate business of Al Thani family in Qatar.

He had added that the Avenfield Properties were purchased from the proceeds of the real estate business.

This evidence has once again brought the case to the point where the Supreme Court had raised the question whether the Qatari letters were a myth or reality.

The court will resume hearing of the Avenfield Apartments reference on March 16 (today) wherein Zia would continue recording his statement.