For democracy: Sharif says ready to sit with army
Accountability court rejects Sharif family's exemption plea
PHOTO: REUTERS
ISLAMABAD:
Deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif showed on Thursday his willingness to sit down with the army for democracy, rule of law and supremacy of the Constitution.
What is perceived as a significant development since his disqualification by the Supreme Court in the Panama Papers’ scandal, the three-time former prime minister expressed that he was ready to have a dialogue “with anyone and all”, including the army.
In his talk with the media inside the accountability courtroom, Sharif said that he was ready to sit with the army, political parties and institutions in order to promote inter-institutional dialogue and a national dialogue to defuse tension.
The statement came in response to a question asking Sharif if he was ready for a dialogue as suggested by former Senate chairman Mian Raza Rabbani and later by Senator Mir Hasil Khan Bizenjo.
Rabbani had called for initiating intra-institutional dialogue to avert any possible clash between them while Bizenjo has called for holding a grand debate among key state institutions to take the country forward in a respectable manner and defuse an atmosphere of tension
“I am ready to sit with anyone for democracy, rule of law and supremacy of the Constitution,” Sharif said.
“Will you sit with the army as well,” asked a reporter.
“I am ready to sit with anyone,” he replied, adding all the institutions “should stay in their defined boundaries”.
Sharif expressed his views about several contradictory things in the country. Sharif said that those who abrogated the Constitution were enjoying their lives abroad while a three-time premier was facing cases.
He recalled that Wajid Zia, head of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) who is currently recording his statement against the Sharif family in the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) references, would stand outside former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf’s house in Chak Shahzad for hours but the retired army chief would not meet him.
“He was barred from entering Musharraf’s house,” said Sharif. “I being the prime minister, however, appear before the JIT on my own.”
Recalling the event when former chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was grabbed by the hair and muscled into a car by police officials on March 13, 2007 after being unceremoniously relieved from his duties by Musharraf, the PML-N leader stressed that no contempt notice was taken of that incident till now, “but a contempt notice is being issued every other day on other issues”.
Sharif, while responding to a question about alleged horse-trading that took place during the recently held Senate elections, said, “We’ve become a laughing stock in the eyes of the world.”
“Why was the PML-N government toppled in Balochistan?” he questioned.
“What was the purpose behind selecting the Senate chairman from Balochistan later on?”
Expressing his disappointment over the Pakistan Peoples Party’s (PPP) role in national politics, Sharif ruled out negotiations with the PPP on the interim government set-up.
The former prime minister responded to Bilawal Bhutto Zardari’s statement that the PML-N was backing out from the Charter of Democracy (CoD) by saying that agreeing to the Non-Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) right after signing the CoD had cost the PPP politically.
Condemning the incidents of harassments of Pakistani diplomats in India and Indian diplomats in Pakistan, the PML-N supremo said what made it worse was that it had been happening for decades.
Calling it a ‘tit-for-tat’ move, Sharif pointed out that this behaviour was inappropriate for civilised countries.
Speaking against judicial decisions is my constitutional right: Nawaz
Responding to a question on the innocent lives that become collateral damage in the cross-border firing along the Line of Control (LOC), Sharif termed it an oppression of innocents living by the border and called for finding a solution to the pressing issue.
Wajid Zia’s statement
In his fifth appearance before the court as a witness in the NAB’s reference against Sharifs pertaining to Avenfield Apartments, Zia continued recording his statement.
In his statement, Zia said that no record of any agreement between the Sharif family and the Qatari Royal regarding investment in 1980 nor any document or agreement between Hussain Nawaz and the Qatari Royal at the time of settlement of 2006 resulting in claimed change of ownership of the Avenfield Apartments was provided to the JIT.
Zia informed the court that the JIT assessed evidence and material, and found that the response of the UAE government, the BVI attorney general’s office, the report of forensic expert Robert W Radley and the observations on worksheet (non-production of documents), [it is] “observed that there was sufficient reasons that the testimony of Qatari Prince Hamad Bin Jassim in any case not of much value”.
Zia had presented Qatari Prince Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber al-Thani’s letter pertaining to an investment of AED 12 million made by Mian Sharif with Fahad Al-Thani in earlier hearing.
The JIT head declared the Sharif family’s prime and final defence – the letters from the Qatari prince – as a myth rather than a reality, saying the ruling family had never invested 12 million dirhams in the Qatari royal family’s business.
Zia said the Avenfield properties were not purchased from the proceeds of the real estate business in the UAE.
The defence counsel continued to raise objections -- that opinion or inference from the JIT report or the contents of the Mutual Legal Assistance were not admissible, JIT’s answers were meant for the Supreme Court and inadmissible in the instant case – throughout his statement.
The court would decide which portion of Zia’s statement would be admissible once he completes his testimony.
Meanwhile, Judge Muhammad Bashir dismissed an exemption application of the Sharif family, seeking a week-long exemption starting from March 26 onwards so that they could travel to the United Kingdom to make decisions regarding Kulsoom Nawaz’s treatment plan for cancer.
The court conceded with the NAB argument that the trial was at the concluding stage; hence, the Sharif family should not be allowed to leave the country. The bureau had already requested to place their names on the Exit Control List (ECL).
Along with the request, defence counsels -- Khawaja Haris and Amjad Pervaiz -- presented a medical report of Kulsoom Nawaz, stating that despite six cycles of chemotherapy, there was a relapse.
The NAB prosecutor said that it was not mandatory for the entire family to be present at the hospital, as Kulsoom’s two sons, Hassan and Hussain, are already with her.
The NAB prosecutor’s argument hurt Maryam Nawaz. Speaking to the media during a break in the court proceedings she said she was not expecting an insensitive statement at a difficult time. “This is disheartening.”
Taking to micro-blogging site Twitter, Maryam later said: “When we requested court to grant us a week-long exemption to visit mother, NAB asked whether it was necessary for the entire family to be present there?”
An hour later, Maryam tweeted about a conversation with her mother where Kulsoom asked if the court had granted them exemption. After Maryam informed her in the negative, Kulsoom said it was okay, “God is with us.”
In addition, while replying to a tweet, Maryam added that her mother was waiting. “Haven’t seen her for over four months,” she said. “Our last exemption request was also rejected.”
The court would resume hearing on March 27.
Deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif showed on Thursday his willingness to sit down with the army for democracy, rule of law and supremacy of the Constitution.
What is perceived as a significant development since his disqualification by the Supreme Court in the Panama Papers’ scandal, the three-time former prime minister expressed that he was ready to have a dialogue “with anyone and all”, including the army.
In his talk with the media inside the accountability courtroom, Sharif said that he was ready to sit with the army, political parties and institutions in order to promote inter-institutional dialogue and a national dialogue to defuse tension.
The statement came in response to a question asking Sharif if he was ready for a dialogue as suggested by former Senate chairman Mian Raza Rabbani and later by Senator Mir Hasil Khan Bizenjo.
Rabbani had called for initiating intra-institutional dialogue to avert any possible clash between them while Bizenjo has called for holding a grand debate among key state institutions to take the country forward in a respectable manner and defuse an atmosphere of tension
“I am ready to sit with anyone for democracy, rule of law and supremacy of the Constitution,” Sharif said.
“Will you sit with the army as well,” asked a reporter.
“I am ready to sit with anyone,” he replied, adding all the institutions “should stay in their defined boundaries”.
Sharif expressed his views about several contradictory things in the country. Sharif said that those who abrogated the Constitution were enjoying their lives abroad while a three-time premier was facing cases.
He recalled that Wajid Zia, head of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) who is currently recording his statement against the Sharif family in the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) references, would stand outside former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf’s house in Chak Shahzad for hours but the retired army chief would not meet him.
Musharraf ruined country, now seeks security to return home: Maryam
“He was barred from entering Musharraf’s house,” said Sharif. “I being the prime minister, however, appear before the JIT on my own.”
Recalling the event when former chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was grabbed by the hair and muscled into a car by police officials on March 13, 2007 after being unceremoniously relieved from his duties by Musharraf, the PML-N leader stressed that no contempt notice was taken of that incident till now, “but a contempt notice is being issued every other day on other issues”.
Sharif, while responding to a question about alleged horse-trading that took place during the recently held Senate elections, said, “We’ve become a laughing stock in the eyes of the world.”
“Why was the PML-N government toppled in Balochistan?” he questioned.
“What was the purpose behind selecting the Senate chairman from Balochistan later on?”
Expressing his disappointment over the Pakistan Peoples Party’s (PPP) role in national politics, Sharif ruled out negotiations with the PPP on the interim government set-up.
The former prime minister responded to Bilawal Bhutto Zardari’s statement that the PML-N was backing out from the Charter of Democracy (CoD) by saying that agreeing to the Non-Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) right after signing the CoD had cost the PPP politically.
Condemning the incidents of harassments of Pakistani diplomats in India and Indian diplomats in Pakistan, the PML-N supremo said what made it worse was that it had been happening for decades.
Calling it a ‘tit-for-tat’ move, Sharif pointed out that this behaviour was inappropriate for civilised countries.
Speaking against judicial decisions is my constitutional right: Nawaz
Responding to a question on the innocent lives that become collateral damage in the cross-border firing along the Line of Control (LOC), Sharif termed it an oppression of innocents living by the border and called for finding a solution to the pressing issue.
Wajid Zia’s statement
In his fifth appearance before the court as a witness in the NAB’s reference against Sharifs pertaining to Avenfield Apartments, Zia continued recording his statement.
In his statement, Zia said that no record of any agreement between the Sharif family and the Qatari Royal regarding investment in 1980 nor any document or agreement between Hussain Nawaz and the Qatari Royal at the time of settlement of 2006 resulting in claimed change of ownership of the Avenfield Apartments was provided to the JIT.
Zia informed the court that the JIT assessed evidence and material, and found that the response of the UAE government, the BVI attorney general’s office, the report of forensic expert Robert W Radley and the observations on worksheet (non-production of documents), [it is] “observed that there was sufficient reasons that the testimony of Qatari Prince Hamad Bin Jassim in any case not of much value”.
Zia had presented Qatari Prince Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber al-Thani’s letter pertaining to an investment of AED 12 million made by Mian Sharif with Fahad Al-Thani in earlier hearing.
The JIT head declared the Sharif family’s prime and final defence – the letters from the Qatari prince – as a myth rather than a reality, saying the ruling family had never invested 12 million dirhams in the Qatari royal family’s business.
Zia said the Avenfield properties were not purchased from the proceeds of the real estate business in the UAE.
The defence counsel continued to raise objections -- that opinion or inference from the JIT report or the contents of the Mutual Legal Assistance were not admissible, JIT’s answers were meant for the Supreme Court and inadmissible in the instant case – throughout his statement.
The court would decide which portion of Zia’s statement would be admissible once he completes his testimony.
Meanwhile, Judge Muhammad Bashir dismissed an exemption application of the Sharif family, seeking a week-long exemption starting from March 26 onwards so that they could travel to the United Kingdom to make decisions regarding Kulsoom Nawaz’s treatment plan for cancer.
The court conceded with the NAB argument that the trial was at the concluding stage; hence, the Sharif family should not be allowed to leave the country. The bureau had already requested to place their names on the Exit Control List (ECL).
Along with the request, defence counsels -- Khawaja Haris and Amjad Pervaiz -- presented a medical report of Kulsoom Nawaz, stating that despite six cycles of chemotherapy, there was a relapse.
The NAB prosecutor said that it was not mandatory for the entire family to be present at the hospital, as Kulsoom’s two sons, Hassan and Hussain, are already with her.
The NAB prosecutor’s argument hurt Maryam Nawaz. Speaking to the media during a break in the court proceedings she said she was not expecting an insensitive statement at a difficult time. “This is disheartening.”
Taking to micro-blogging site Twitter, Maryam later said: “When we requested court to grant us a week-long exemption to visit mother, NAB asked whether it was necessary for the entire family to be present there?”
An hour later, Maryam tweeted about a conversation with her mother where Kulsoom asked if the court had granted them exemption. After Maryam informed her in the negative, Kulsoom said it was okay, “God is with us.”
In addition, while replying to a tweet, Maryam added that her mother was waiting. “Haven’t seen her for over four months,” she said. “Our last exemption request was also rejected.”
The court would resume hearing on March 27.