Avenfield Apartment: Star witness changes stance over questionnaire
JIT head Zia admits findings on Sharifs’ alleged forgery based on ‘assumptions’
JIT Head Wajid Zia. PHOTO: FILE
ISLAMABAD:
Star prosecution witness Wajid Zia admitted on Friday that the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) had sought help from Dubai authorities over a matter that happened in Sharjah and gave findings on Sharifs’ alleged forgery in the 1980s on the basis of an "assumption".
He also changed his stance over sending a questionnaire to someone in advance.
The JIT head backtracked from his earlier stance that he never sent a questionnaire to anyone in his entire career while admitting that the JIT had sent a questionnaire to a law firm in the United Kingdom regarding two trust deeds pertaining to the Avenfield Apartments.
The details emerged during cross-examination of the witness against the Sharif family in the Avenfield Apartments reference. When the case was taken up, defence counsel Khawaja Haris enquired from Zia if the JIT communicated with Jeremy Freeman of the Freeman Box Solicitors. Zia affirmed the query.
During cross-examination, Zia admitted that the JIT decided not to communicate directly or indirectly with Freeman and gave instructions to a law firm – Quist Solicitors, being run by Zia’s cousin Akhtar Raja – to correspond with Freeman on the JIT’s behalf.
PM Abbasi must have begged CJP to 'save' Nawaz Sharif, says Imran
In the subsequent question, Zia admitted that the communication was in the form of a questionnaire – as opposed to the Qatari prince’s matter where the JIT failed to develop consensus and decided not to send a questionnaire to him in advance despite him making a request.
On March 29, Zia said that in his entire career he has “never sent a questionnaire in advance to any witness”. He also agreed that the JIT did not ask Freeman to record a statement or come to Pakistan.
About the issue of transportation of ‘scrap machinery’ from Dubai to Jeddah, Zia admitted that he had seen the ‘Letter of Credit’ before sending a Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) request to Dubai authorities, seeking answers to several questions.
The Ministry of Justice, Dubai, through the MLA had informed the JIT that after a check in records of Dubai Customs, it seems that there wasn’t any scrap machinery transported from Dubai to Jeddah during 2001-2002.
He said the JIT wrote to Dubai authorities regarding the scrap machinery of the Ahli Stell Mill being transported to Jeddah but during cross-examining, it emerged that “Second Hand Rolling Mill Equipment in Dismanted (sic) Form” was transported from Sharjah to Jeddah -- and not from Dubai to Jeddah.
He admitted that the JIT did not send the MLA for verification of the letter of credit to authorities in Sharjah. He also conceded that the JIT members did not go to examine the record of Dubai Courts System in the UAE.
However, he voluntarily explained that the JIT concluded in its investigation that the 1980’s agreement was a forged document.
In the MLA, the JIT had asked Dubai authorities if there was an agreement pertaining to the sale of shares regarding Tariq Shafi in the Ahli Steel Mills on April 4, 1980, was it genuine or fake and was it notarised by the Dubai Courts on May 30, 2016.
Sharif submitted fake docs to mislead SC, alleges Zia
The authorities had replied that no record of the share sale existed, no transaction ever took place and no record of notarisation was found.
However, to a question if there was any witness or accused who deposed that the 1980’s agreement was needed to be registered in the Dubai court, Zia replied in the negative.
Zia once again explained that since the 1978’s agreement set that condition; therefore, the JIT ‘assumed’ that it would be the same in the 1980’s agreement.
After a few questions, he said it was correct to suggest that the 1978’s agreement contained the condition of registration in the Dubai Court System but it was not mentioned in the 1980’s agreement.
Also, Friday’s proceedings revealed that the JIT did not verify the authenticity of the Share Sale Contract of 1978 agreement and assumed its content as correct.
Contrary to this, the JIT declared the agreement of April 14, 1980, forged after receiving a reply of the MLA from Dubai authorities.
During cross-examination, Zia, however, conceded that no witness or accused has deposed to the fact that the sum of AED 12 million as sale proceeds of the 25 per cent shares of the Ahli Steel Mills (erstwhile Gulf Steel Mills) would be paid through the Dubai Courts System.
It also emerged on Friday that the Gulf Steel Mills’ first payment of sale price was AED 21,375,000 for 75 per cent shares in 1978 while for the remaining 25 per cent it was AED 12 million in 1980, reaching to the total consideration of 33,375,000 AED.
Meanwhile, National Accountability Bureau (NAB) prosecutor Sardar Muzaffar Abbasi said that Haris was a “mental, old man who has gone mad” while misjudging Haris’ comment that it was “mental work”.
Haris, who got annoyed by Abbasi’s frequent interruptions, did not comment on his remarks. Later, they reconciled.
Star prosecution witness Wajid Zia admitted on Friday that the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) had sought help from Dubai authorities over a matter that happened in Sharjah and gave findings on Sharifs’ alleged forgery in the 1980s on the basis of an "assumption".
He also changed his stance over sending a questionnaire to someone in advance.
The JIT head backtracked from his earlier stance that he never sent a questionnaire to anyone in his entire career while admitting that the JIT had sent a questionnaire to a law firm in the United Kingdom regarding two trust deeds pertaining to the Avenfield Apartments.
The details emerged during cross-examination of the witness against the Sharif family in the Avenfield Apartments reference. When the case was taken up, defence counsel Khawaja Haris enquired from Zia if the JIT communicated with Jeremy Freeman of the Freeman Box Solicitors. Zia affirmed the query.
During cross-examination, Zia admitted that the JIT decided not to communicate directly or indirectly with Freeman and gave instructions to a law firm – Quist Solicitors, being run by Zia’s cousin Akhtar Raja – to correspond with Freeman on the JIT’s behalf.
PM Abbasi must have begged CJP to 'save' Nawaz Sharif, says Imran
In the subsequent question, Zia admitted that the communication was in the form of a questionnaire – as opposed to the Qatari prince’s matter where the JIT failed to develop consensus and decided not to send a questionnaire to him in advance despite him making a request.
On March 29, Zia said that in his entire career he has “never sent a questionnaire in advance to any witness”. He also agreed that the JIT did not ask Freeman to record a statement or come to Pakistan.
About the issue of transportation of ‘scrap machinery’ from Dubai to Jeddah, Zia admitted that he had seen the ‘Letter of Credit’ before sending a Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) request to Dubai authorities, seeking answers to several questions.
The Ministry of Justice, Dubai, through the MLA had informed the JIT that after a check in records of Dubai Customs, it seems that there wasn’t any scrap machinery transported from Dubai to Jeddah during 2001-2002.
He said the JIT wrote to Dubai authorities regarding the scrap machinery of the Ahli Stell Mill being transported to Jeddah but during cross-examining, it emerged that “Second Hand Rolling Mill Equipment in Dismanted (sic) Form” was transported from Sharjah to Jeddah -- and not from Dubai to Jeddah.
He admitted that the JIT did not send the MLA for verification of the letter of credit to authorities in Sharjah. He also conceded that the JIT members did not go to examine the record of Dubai Courts System in the UAE.
However, he voluntarily explained that the JIT concluded in its investigation that the 1980’s agreement was a forged document.
In the MLA, the JIT had asked Dubai authorities if there was an agreement pertaining to the sale of shares regarding Tariq Shafi in the Ahli Steel Mills on April 4, 1980, was it genuine or fake and was it notarised by the Dubai Courts on May 30, 2016.
Sharif submitted fake docs to mislead SC, alleges Zia
The authorities had replied that no record of the share sale existed, no transaction ever took place and no record of notarisation was found.
However, to a question if there was any witness or accused who deposed that the 1980’s agreement was needed to be registered in the Dubai court, Zia replied in the negative.
Zia once again explained that since the 1978’s agreement set that condition; therefore, the JIT ‘assumed’ that it would be the same in the 1980’s agreement.
After a few questions, he said it was correct to suggest that the 1978’s agreement contained the condition of registration in the Dubai Court System but it was not mentioned in the 1980’s agreement.
Also, Friday’s proceedings revealed that the JIT did not verify the authenticity of the Share Sale Contract of 1978 agreement and assumed its content as correct.
Contrary to this, the JIT declared the agreement of April 14, 1980, forged after receiving a reply of the MLA from Dubai authorities.
During cross-examination, Zia, however, conceded that no witness or accused has deposed to the fact that the sum of AED 12 million as sale proceeds of the 25 per cent shares of the Ahli Steel Mills (erstwhile Gulf Steel Mills) would be paid through the Dubai Courts System.
It also emerged on Friday that the Gulf Steel Mills’ first payment of sale price was AED 21,375,000 for 75 per cent shares in 1978 while for the remaining 25 per cent it was AED 12 million in 1980, reaching to the total consideration of 33,375,000 AED.
Meanwhile, National Accountability Bureau (NAB) prosecutor Sardar Muzaffar Abbasi said that Haris was a “mental, old man who has gone mad” while misjudging Haris’ comment that it was “mental work”.
Haris, who got annoyed by Abbasi’s frequent interruptions, did not comment on his remarks. Later, they reconciled.