Al Azizia reference: Defence disputes UAE response to MLA
Judge says court can summon Maryam Nawaz if NAB files request to record her statement
Deposed Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. PHOTO: FILE
ISLAMABAD:
Defence lawyer Khawaja Haris on Monday continued his final arguments in the Al-Azizia Steel Mills reference against deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif on the fourth consecutive day on Monday, telling the accountability court that the contents of the reply from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in response to the mutual legal assistance (MLA) seemed to be false.
Citing the prosecution's stance, Haris told Accountability Court-II Judge Arshad Malik that his client was not the main beneficiary of the money, which he had received from the business abroad as he had gifted most of it to her daughter Maryam Nawaz. The judge remarked that the court could summon Maryam Nawaz if NAB filed a request to record her statement.
Arguing that the contents of the UAE response to the MLA seemed to be false, Haris went on to day that the witnesses, who recorded their statements before the joint investigation team (JIT), were not produced before the trial court.
He added no guess could be made as to what statements Shehbaz Sharif and Tariq Shafi had given before the JIT.
He said that the JIT team had spent huge money to get source documents related to the case and the contract for the purpose was given to a certain firm. Such source documents could not be presented as evidence, he added.
The judge asked Haris to give arguments regarding the establishment of Al-Azizia Steel Mills for legal point of view. Later, the court adjourned the case till Tuesday, when Haris would continue his final arguments.
Defence lawyer Khawaja Haris on Monday continued his final arguments in the Al-Azizia Steel Mills reference against deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif on the fourth consecutive day on Monday, telling the accountability court that the contents of the reply from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in response to the mutual legal assistance (MLA) seemed to be false.
Citing the prosecution's stance, Haris told Accountability Court-II Judge Arshad Malik that his client was not the main beneficiary of the money, which he had received from the business abroad as he had gifted most of it to her daughter Maryam Nawaz. The judge remarked that the court could summon Maryam Nawaz if NAB filed a request to record her statement.
Arguing that the contents of the UAE response to the MLA seemed to be false, Haris went on to day that the witnesses, who recorded their statements before the joint investigation team (JIT), were not produced before the trial court.
He added no guess could be made as to what statements Shehbaz Sharif and Tariq Shafi had given before the JIT.
He said that the JIT team had spent huge money to get source documents related to the case and the contract for the purpose was given to a certain firm. Such source documents could not be presented as evidence, he added.
The judge asked Haris to give arguments regarding the establishment of Al-Azizia Steel Mills for legal point of view. Later, the court adjourned the case till Tuesday, when Haris would continue his final arguments.