Bench to review material before deciding on PM's disqualification, NAB reference

ISLAMABAD: The three-member special Supreme Court bench hearing the Panama Papers case observed on Tuesday that it would examine all the material and then decide on disqualifying the premier or sending the matter to an accountability court.

The bench resumed hearing the case after the petitioners presented their arguments in favour of the Joint Investigation Team’s (JIT) final report a day earlier.

Addressing the special implementation bench, headed by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, the Sharif family's lawyer Khawaja Harris, read out the original 13 questions posed by the Supreme Court to the JIT.

He said the court, in its April 20 judgment, had not ordered for reopening of any case against Nawaz Sharif.

Harris claimed the JIT also included a probe of 'assets beyond means' in its investigation and went on to answer 15 questions instead of the original 13.

Justice Ijazul Ahsan observed that a number of issues are related to the court's 13 questions adding that the money trail of the London properties is a complicated saga.

The main issue is to probe the London money trail, he observed further.

The court will decide if the JIT’s recommendations have to be implemented, he remarked.

In similar comments, Justice Ejaz said the JIT has only given its recommendations, whereas any order on the issue will be passed by the court.

“Don’t want to comment on any aspect of the JIT report at this time,” he remarked.

He added that the trial court will decide if including the Hudaibiya Paper Mills case in the JIT report was right or wrong.

Addressing the counsel for the respondent, Justice Ijaz observed that the counsel could have in defence of his client, but had not done so. 

“Facts were hidden and answers [were] not provided to the JIT,” he observed. Someone claimed they do not remember while others said their accountant may know, he added.

Justice Ijaz also observed that the premier and his sons’ approach was to not say anything to the JIT.

The prime minister and everyone else was given a chance to defend themselves, it is wrong to say otherwise, he remarked further.

Justice Azmat said the bench has heard and understood the defence counsel's arguments.

Harris argued that it was not the JIT’s mandate to give a verdict. 

Justice Azmat remarked, that if the JIT made recommendations after its investigation then what is so wrong with it? 

“The order of the court will be more important than the JIT’s recommendations,” he observed.

Addressing Harris, Justice Azmat observed that the defence had not disputed any document cited in the JIT report.

The premier’s counsel argued before the court that the prime minister did not own any offshore company nor withdrew any salary from such a company.

Are you saying this charge is false? asked Justice Azmat, to which Harris responded in the affirmative. “FZE Capital is owned by Hasan Nawaz,” Harris argued.

The bench asked Harris if the prime minister is Hasan’s father and chairman of FZE Capital.

"Did he not get an iqama?" Justice Ijaz asked further.

Harris didn’t clarify if Nawaz is associated in any other way with the company or whether he received an iqama (work permit) from the UAE government.

Harris claimed the JIT probe is not transparent. The prime minister was not asked to verify the documents and therefore the court could not issue an order based on the JIT report, he argued.

Justice Ijaz observed that on one hand it is said they [Sharif family] talk about everything at home, yet no one knew who owns the London properties. 

“The premier kept visiting the flats but doesn’t know who owns them,” he remarked further.

Harris claimed several questions not posed to the prime minister were included in JIT report. “It should be probed why I wasn’t given chance to confront documents against the prime minister,” he added.

Justice Azmat responded that the defence counsel may submit a separate application to the Supreme Court in this regard.

With regards to volume 10 of the JIT report, which was kept confidential at the request of the JIT, Justice Azmat remarked that the court can make the volume public if the defence counsel requested.

Justice Ejaz observed that the JIT inquiry is not ongoing anymore, while Justice Ijaz remarked that volume 10 does not contain evidence.

Before the start of proceedings, Senior Advocate Salman Akram Raja, representing Nawaz Sharif's children, said he will present his arguments in court tomorrow (Wednesday).

The court then broke for a short recess.

Returning after the break, the prime minister's counsel resumed his arguments.

Harris argued that the documents had not been verified by the relevant Pakistani embassy and therefore cannot be considered authentic. He reiterated, that the foreign government has to be involved in any MLA request.

Justice Ejaz observed that documents were provided to the JIT through Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA). Should we disregard them just on the pretext that the relevant foreign government did not provide them with the relevant record, he asked.

Justice Ijaz remarked that it was claimed[by the respondent] that a money trail was available, but one was not made available.

“The JIT was formed so the prime minister and others could independently provide evidence and their points of view,” he observed further.

Justice Ejaz remarked that there are only two ways to proceed now: either the bench or an accountability court can proceed further.

Justice Ijaz observed, that if the documents being provided were originals, they did not require verification by the embassy.

Justice Ijaz remarked that the prime minister, Maryam and Hasan said they would present evidence in their defence, but failed to do so. 

“The JIT was formed to give the Sharif family a chance. It was not formed to bring additional matters to the fore but now that, that has happened, [it] is a different thing,” he observed.

The ownership of the London properties will have to be proven with records, observed Justice Ejaz. He remarked that it was the premier’s job to provide the record of how funds were generated to purchase the London flats. 

“We will pursue the complete material and then decide if a disqualification is warranted or not,” he remarked further.

Justice Azmat observed, that the Sharif family was given a chance in court to present records before the formation of the JIT. “Not a single document was brought forward showing that Hussain Nawaz owns the London flats,” he observed, adding, that there are cases available where the owner of the assets has to provide a money trail.

The bench also observed that the April 20 order of the five-judge bench was an interim order.

The hearing was later adjourned until tomorrow. 

Pre-hearing media talks 

As was the case on Monday, Awami Muslim League (AML) chief Sheikh Rashid informally began the day's events by addressing the media. He said they [Sharif family] have no case. 

The AML chief also criticised the Sharif family's claims against ISI's Brig (retd) Nauman Saeed — one of two JIT members from military intelligence agencies.

"Don’t mess with the judges and the generals. There were 19 cases against Nawaz Sharif and he was only tried in two," said Rashid.

State minister Abid Sher Ali addressed the media afterwards and came down hard on Sheikh Rashid. 

Rashid also criticised Pakistan Muslim League-Q leader Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain for being an uninvited guest at yesterday's hearing. 

The State Minister for Water and Power, Abid Sher Ali said the courts will decide the matter according to facts, not according people's wishes. 

Opposition Leader Khursheed Shah said the Supreme Court is the country’s highest court where justice is dispensed. Speaking to the media outside the apex court, the senior Pakistan Peoples Party leader said they had faith in the Supreme Court. 

Shah also reiterated the opposition's demand for the prime minister's resignation, saying the preservation of democracy is supreme. 

Previous hearing

On Monday, the petitioners delivered their arguments in favour of the Panama case JIT report and against the Sharif family.

The counsels for the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) and Sheikh Rashid presented their arguments during Monday’s proceedings.

PTI counsel Naeem Bukhari pleaded with the apex court to summon Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for cross examination, disqualify him from Parliament and send cases against him and his family to an accountability court.

The counsel for JI argued that the premier did not speak the truth during his speech in Parliament.

Sheikh Rashid, presenting his arguments, said the nation was embarrassed to find out its prime minister is a paid employer of another company.

In his brief remarks to the bench on Monday, the Sharif family's lawyer said a case against the Sharif family cannot be undertaken on the basis of the JIT report.

The bench observed that an investigation was required based on the nature of the allegations and was thus directed. "The JIT was not conducting a trial...choose you words carefully," observed Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed.

Later, the bench adjourned the hearing, with Justice Ejaz observing that they do not wish to waste the court and the nation's time.

During proceedings, Justice Ejaz wondered if the JIT can trust the veracity of the documents while Justice Ijazul Ahsan asked the JI counsel to inform the bench to what extent could it implement the JIT’s findings and use its authority.

The JIT, formed in light of the apex court’s April 20 judgment to probe the Sharif family’s money trail, submitted its 60-day investigation report to the court on July 10.

The report highlighted the failure of the Sharif family to provide a money trail for its London apartments and claimed the prime minister and his children own assets beyond their known sources of income.

Following the report's submission, the special bench issued notices to all parties to submit their responses.