SC adjourns Panamagate case hearing till Monday, JI to continue arguments


ISLAMABAD: The five-member larger bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa adjourned the hearing of Panamagate case seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif over the revelation of the names of his children in the Panama Papers till Monday January 23 with the direction to the counsel of Jamaat-e-Islami to continue his arguments at the next hearing.
The counsel of the prime minister Makhdoom Ali Khan concluded his arguments yesterday and the counsel of Jamaat-e-Islami Taufiq Asif started arguing case when the hearing resumed this morning saying that prime minister has failed to honor the trust that his oath demands.
Are you saying that since prime minister has failed to fulfill the demands of his oath he should be disqualified, Justice Azmat Saeed asked to which Taufiq Asif said that prime minister’s speech itself is a confession statement. Ittefaq Foundry was in running in loss in 1980 but according to prime minister it overcame its losses and reverted back into Rs 600 million profit while Ittefaq Foundry expanded to many other companies, he added.
Continuing he added Gulf Steel Mill was established in Dubai which was sold for nine million dollars, the prime minister’s speech, which stated that flats were bought during 1993 to 1996, should be accepted as true because there is no other way. To this Justice Khosa replied that this has not been accepted, if it had been so why we would had been listening the case.
Taufiq Asif said that Nawaz Sharif had said in his speech that he was not in politics at the time of Dubai mill was established. Here Justice Azmat asked him you say that there is confessional and not contradiction in the speech show us the part where the confession is being made. Your case is very different than the PTI’s case because Naeem Bukhari had talked of contradictions in priem minister’s speech, Justice Azmat added.
Continuing Justice Azmat said there are two questions here; Number one when the flats were nought, two, what relation do they have with the prime minister. There is confessional to the point of purchase of flats but not that the properties were bought by Nawaz Sharif, he added. The mentioning of purchase of London flats is also with reference to the father, Justice Ijaz added.
Replying Taufiq Asf said that London flats are mentioned in Zafar Ali Shah case. Was Nawaz Sharif a party in Zafar Ali Shah case, asked Justice Khosa to which Taufiq replied that Nawaz Sharif was party number one in the said case and Khalid Anwar argued his case then. At this point counsel of the prime minister Makhdoom Ali Khan said that Nawaz Sharif was not a party in Zafar Ali Shah case after which Taufiq withdraw arguments over the said case.
Fear God Taufiq Asif, the refernces you are presenting are lawyers’ arguments not court decision, the ownership of the property in that case was not proved, tell the court about the contradictions in Nawaz Sharif’s statements, Justice Azmat said.
To this Taufiq said that he will give arguments of jurisdiction of powers, give proofs and money trail is the responsibility of the Sharif family. Nawaz Sharif has asked for privilege under Article 66 and not immunity, Justice Khosa said.
Addressing Taufiq Justice Gulzar warned him not t take the case so non-seriously. Should the court slap Article 62 or 63 on you for misstatement, Justice Azmat Saeed asked the counsel of the JI.
Continuing Taufiq said that Nawaz Sharif’s speech in the National Assembly was not over government policies but as MNA rebutting persobal accusations and thus does enjoy parliamentary privilege.
Was prime minister’s speech was part of the agenda, could floor of the assemby be used to rebut personal allegations, asked Justice Ijaz.
A little later Justice Azmat asked Taufiq Asif where are we being taken to, so us the part of prime minister’s speech where he confessed being involved in Panamagate.
Talking to media outside the Supreme Court before the start of the hearing today Shaikh Rasheed said that the coffin of corruption would come out from the Supreme Court. The government ministers are trying to threaten the court to give an impression of conspiracy against them while during his ten days arguments in the court the counsel of the prime minister Makhdoom Ali Khan did not inform about the money trail, such expensive gifts given by sons of the prime minister to their fathers were not even given by Mughal kings to their parents, he added.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here