Daily Times

ISLAMABAD: Wednesday court proceedings into the Panama Papers leak have made the possibility of Nawaz Sharif’s disqualification a distinct likelihood, with the submission of the Sharif family’s money trail highlighting many of the falsities that the premier and his children had stated.

The submission of daughter Maryam Safdar’s tax returns, point to the fact that the prime minister’s statements, alleging that Maryam was not dependent on him, were false. One instance of a discrepancy in the facts and assertions is that the premier’s 2011 wealth statement showed that he had declared an agricultural land in Maryam’s name; however that property was not declared in next year’s statement.

The reason given by the family to the court was that Maryam Safdar had provided the payment for the property; however her own 2012 wealth statement does not include any property of similar value. This has led to questions over whether the property was purchased for a higher value, a move which required Nawaz Sharif to declare the premium he earned, something which he did not do. If on the other hand the property was purchased for a similar consideration then it was necessary for Maryam Safdar to declare her possession of the property, which was again not done.

The issue falls under National Accountability Bureau Ordinance, 1999 Section 5(c) which states, “Assets means any property owned, controlled by or belonging to any accused, whether directly or indirectly, or held benami in the name of his spouse or relatives or associates, whether within or outside Pakistan, for which they cannot reasonably account, or for which they cannot prove payment of full and lawful consideration”.

The PM’s counsel had claimed that Maryam was not dependent on him, which on the basis of the mentioned example, is factually wrong. The documents confirm that even in order to acquire the asset in question, she had to take gifts from her father.

The evidence instead points towards the fact that Nawaz’s money, received from son Hussain as a gift from abroad, was utilised to show assets in Maryam’s name, who originally had no resources of her own, to purchase the assets.

The undermining of the premier and his family’s original claims in court make the possibility of his absolution much grimmer.