ISLAMABAD: The five-member larger bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa and comprising Justice Ijaz Afzal Khan, Justice Gulzar Ahmad, Justice Azmat Saeed Shaikh, and Justice Ijaz-ul-Hassan summoning Chairmen NAB and FBR adjourned the hearing of petitions seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif over the involvement of his children in what has come to know better as Panamagate case till February 21.
When the hearing resumed today the counsel of prime minister’s sons Hassan and Hussain Nawaz Salman Akram Raja continued arguing his side of the case from yesterday.
Salman Akram Raja submitted the record of services record with Minerva over which Justice Khosa asked him if he had filed the record over the Panama Papers case to which Salman replied that he would inform the court about it along with the dates.
He told the court that the registered shares in the name of Minerva Company were issued in July 2006 while Maryam Nawaz remained a shareholder from February 2006 to July 2006 as a trustee during which time the shares certificates remained with her and with the cancellation of barrier certificates Maryam Nawaz’s ceased her share holder’s position to which Salman replied in negative.Minerva Company provided its directors for Nielsen and Nescoll companies while in 2014 the shares were transferred from Minerva to trustee services, Salman continued.
At this point Justice Ijaz-ul-Haq asked if the trust deed ceased to be after the transfer of shares Salman replied tha teven if it is proved that Maryam is a dependent she doesn’t proved to be the owner of the flats.
Justice Ijaz said that the court has also to look at Hussain Nawaz’s investment to purchase expensive properties in the posh area of London and also the document if Maryam Nawaz used to work as the representative of Hussain Nawaz. Salman replied that these document is trust deed between Hussain and Maryam Nawaz.
At this point in time Justice Khosa said that it doesn’t matter if Hussain Nawaz or Maryam Nawaz appraoched for the cancellation of barrier certificates in July 2006 to which Salman said that in Asghar Khan case Assad Durrani and Aslam Beg had accepted the charges to which Justice Azmat asked whether the evidence was recorded in that case? Salman replied that after acceptance of the charges recording of evidence was not required.
Continuing his arguments said that Mossack Fonseca had expressed detachment from its document while Maryam Nawaz has also said that the document does not carry her signature. Justice Ijaz then from where the document has come to which Salman said he does not know from where the document came or who brought it and that it looks as if Mossack Fonseca documents were made fraudulently. Fake documents of Maryam Nawaz being the beneficiary owner were submitted in teh court, he added.
Here Justice Khosa askes Salam whether he intends to say that the chain about the flats is being completed? Justice Ijaz commented that Hussain Nawaz had no investment to purchase such expensive properties. Salman said that Hussain Nawaz acquired the property in lieu of Qatari investment.
Justice Khosa asked Salman that according to him Qatari provided the entire investment to Hassan and Hussain Nawaz and yet no record of such massive business and transactions were kept by you. Is not providing documents a part of strategy, he added. Salman replying in negative over which Justice Ijaz Afzal remarked that if its not a strategy then it must be a gamble which made the court burst out in laughter.
Justice Ijaz Afzal remarked that the court could form a commission in this case or forward the matter to the relevant departments but it is being said that institutions do not work so what we could do in such a case, should we go to Rawal Dam and catch fish.
When Salman argued that even Shaitan (Satan) was given a chance to explain that there could not be a ‘fishing enquiry’ Justice Khosa said that Satan was given the opportunity for explanation according to the Shariat Law.
Justice Azmat said that the time of the court is being wasted and not a penny worth of work has been done. Salman replied saying that Article 10-A talks of transparent trial while commission has no powers to punish or award anyone to which Justice Ijaz Afzal remarked that the work of the commission is to gather proofs.
Addressing Salman Justice Khosa said that could be two things in this case: first we should accept the argument of Qatariwalla or we reject it but since you have only one argument and no documents. Salman replied saying that he has presented the documents he have to which Justice Khosa said that that’s why I am saying that you are gambling which could go in favor of anyone. The court would decide about the nature of the court in the end, he added.
Salman replied that if the court does not accept Qatariwalla’s argument then the petitioner has to prove that we have commoitted a crime to which Justice Azmat Saeed said that the case is only this whether Maryam is the beneficiary trustee of the property or not and second case is that of Sirajul Haq in which he is saying that corruption should not be overlooked and that those involved in it should be declared disqualified. If Sirajul Haq manages to prove this it’s OK otherwise his plea would be considered political rivalry, he added.
Commenting on the 800-page reply submitted by the PTI today Justice Azmat said that if such a thick volume of documents would be received how the case could be concluded. Isn’t it a conspiracy that case never finishes, he added.
