During the proceedings, the defense counsel pleaded before that Hussain Nawaz, son of Nawaz Sharif, was responsible to answer questions about the establishment of Al-Azizia Steel Mills and Hill Metal Establishment (HME).
Accountability Judge Arshad Malik heard the Al-Azizia Steel Mills reference. Accused Nawaz Sharif appeared before the court for some time and was later allowed by the judge to leave.
Haris argued that NAB depended only on the report of the joint investigation team (JIT) in filing the references against his client.
The judge remarked that if Hassan and Hussain Nawaz had appeared before the court, NAB’s responsibility would have been limited to only proving their connection with their father. In that case, Haris responded, the statements of Hassan and Hussain could be used against his client.
He said NAB did not include the other people, who had received money from the HME, in its investigation process. Those people were employees of HME, he said, adding that the investigating officer could not make such claim that his client had become influential after holding various public offices in the country.
Haris said that NAB did not investigate the matter pertaining to shifting of ownership to Nawaz’s sons. He added that being a non-resident citizen, Hussain was not bound to declare his businesses in foreign countries in Pakistan.
The court acceded to the request of NAB Deputy Prosecutor General Sardar Muzafar Abbasi and allowed him to contest some points raised by the defence side. The case was adjourned till Thursday (today).
With the conclusion of the arguments by the defence side, the references against the Sharif family entered into their final stage. It is expected that the judge might reserve his verdict on Thursday -- 11 days before the Supreme Court deadline set for the accountability court.
The proceedings started in September last year and until Wednesday, Sharif faced 123 court hearings. NAB presented 22 prosecution witnesses, including the JIT head Wajid Zia. Former premier Nawaz Sharif did not present his defence in either of the two references. The Supreme Court has ordered the court to announce its verdict by December 24.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ