Proof of financial gain must for NAB case: IHC

Court adjourns hearing of plea filed by Zardari till Dec 8

ISLAMABAD:

The Islamabad High Court on Tuesday, while hearing a plea filed by former president Asif Ali Zardari against the verdict of an accountability court, observed that it was necessary for the National Accountability Bureau to have evidence of financial gain to file a case against somebody.

A two-member IHC bench, comprising Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Ghulam Azam Qambrani, also issued notice to the anti-graft watchdog on the appeals and adjourned the hearing till December 8.

The PPP co-chairman has moved the IHC against an Islamabad accountability court’s decision to dismiss his plea challenging NAB’s jurisdiction in the Park Lane reference.

The IHC clubbed Zardari’s plea with a petition filed by Bilal Sheikh, the former president of a bank.

During the proceedings, Sheikh’s lawyer prayed that his client was not accused of taking any financial advantage. “There can be no case [against the client if there is no evidence of financial gain under the amended accountability ordinance,” he added.

Justice Farooq noted that even if there is no amendment to the ordinance, evidence of financial gain was necessary in a NAB case.

“There cannot be a NAB case if someone’s decision turns out to be wrong later.”

The judge added that there was also already a decision by the Supreme Court that evidence of personal or financial benefit was mandatory to charge the accused.

Zardari’s counsel, Farooq H Naek, contended that his client had his client had neither acquired a loan, nor given one but NAB had filed a case of miuse of power against him.

NAB prosecutor Sardar Muzaffar informed the court that a money laundering and corruption case had been registered against Zardari.

Naek replied that everything was now being referred to as money laundering.

Justice Farooq noted that the question was whether the accused had received any financial benefit or not.

He added that all bureaucrats would go to jail if only their decisions were taken into consideration.

“Decision made in good faith today may be wrong tomorrow. If such cases are filed, the bureaucracy will not work tomorrow.”

Zardari’s counsel, Farooq H Naek, maintained that this was the reason why bureaucrats were not performing well these days.

The Park Lane case is being investigated under different sections of the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999, and the Anti-Money Laundering Act, 2010, over Zardari’s alleged involvement in extending loan and its misappropriation by Parthenon Private Limited.