Arguments continue in Flagship reference

Sharif skips hearing for security reason; SC deadline to finish case nears


Our Correspondent October 25, 2018
Joint Investigation Team (JIT) head, Wajid Zia PHOTO: FILE

ISLAMABAD: An accountability court on Wednesday continued hearing the Flagship reference against deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif in the wake of the deadline allotted by the Supreme Court (SC) to finish hearing the case by Nov 17.

The former premier did not appear before the two-member bench headed by Judge Arshad Malik owing to security reasons but his counsel Khawaja Harris was present to argue against statements made by Panamagate Joint Investigation Team (JIT) head Wajid Zia.

During the hearing, Zia contended before the court that Gorneca International confirmed that the copies of the documents provided by Capital FZE are genuine. However, he did point out that Gorneca did not include any JIT member in the investigation.

"JIT did not request any information regarding Capital FZE nor requested the verified copies of its trading license," said Zia. "The JIT has not taken information about the owner, directors, secretary and signing authority of Capital FZE."

The JIT head further added that the investigation team did not find any document that identified the date on which Capital FZE was set up. "It is true that while making the statements on Avenfield reference, I had sought help from various volunteers."

Flagship case: Haris, NAB prosecutor argue over Capital FZE

He also said members of the JIT went to Jafza to obtain records pertaining to Capital FZE. "Upon their return from Dubai, the JIT members told that they had orally requested the Jafza officials to provide them the desired records."

As the arguments intensified, the court echoed with laughter as Harris and Zia exchanged comments. "I could not understand you during Avenfield reference hearing but now I have started to comprehend you” said Zia. To which Haris responded by saying, "If Zia had appeared as a witness so many times in any other case then he would have been termed as a stock witness."

Hearing was adjourned till Oct 25.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ