Daily Times

ISLAMABAD: The second day of the Panamagate hearing, after reconstitution of a larger bench, raised an unpleasant possibility for the ruling family as the Supreme Court of Pakistan on Thursday hinted that it could summon the Sharif family if contradictions between members regarding the purchase of London flats surfaced.

“If the Sharif family contradicts previous interviews regarding London flats, the top court can summon them,” Justice Asif Saeed Khosa observed while heading a five judge larger bench hearing Panamagate case. Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed, another member of the bench, observed that we need to find the truth as the interest generated because everyone wants to know the truth.

These observations came following the arguments of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) counsel Naeem Bukhari who appraised the court about certain contradictions through the Sharif Family’s statements, which were broadcast in different interviews regarding the purchase and possessions of London flats.

When the hearing resumed, Bukhari argued over the Qatari prince’s letter and interviews of the Sharif family members on different private channels and international media. He argued that the Qatari letter did not mention any source of remittances for the purchase of London flats adding that purchase of property in the UK could not be done without solicitors. The said letter does not name any solicitor nor does it mention how the flats were acquired between 1993 and 1996.

The account settlement between the Al-thani family and Hussain Nawaz was done in 2006 but there was uncertainty surrounding who delivered the certificates. Bukhari added that the letter was a complete concoction in order to support the stance of the premier’s children. Justice Saeed observed that the issue was very simple, but there was no banking transaction while this channel must have been employed.

The court, however, rejected Bukhari’s plea of taking out the Qatari letter from the case. Justice Khosa observed that the letter is the presentation of one party, and that it would go a long way in support of the petitioner’s case, adding that the letter should be considered regardless. Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, another member of the larger bench, said “We know the dates and prices, and if the Qatari letter is taken out, it can easily be concluded that the Sharif Family purchased the flats,” said Bukhari.

However, Justice Saeed said that the court needed “material evidence. Don’t make sweeping statements and tempt the court,” remarked Justice Saeed adding if the letter was not correct the petitioner would have to answer to the court. Through an interview in electronic media, Bukhari argued that there are apparently some admissions that Maryam Safdar did not own a house in Pakistan or even outside the country. Justice Khosa observed that if anyone denied their media statements, then they would have to place statements on the record.

Likewise, Bukhari further argued, the prime minister in his interview said that he separated the politics from business in 1997. On this Justice Khosa remarked, “do we have any document of disassociation of business adding is there any record of this?” To this, Bukhari said no record was available.

Bukhari said that in the Al-toufeeq case in 2000, the charge on Flat 17 on the application to withdraw by auction of 34 million dollars was lifted. He questioned why the Sharif Family paid the money if the property was owned by the Al-thani family. Bukhari further said that Maryam was and had been dependent on her father, and she was also the beneficial owner of the flats in London.

“Unless the word ‘dependent’ is defined clearly, it would not be possible to appreciate your argument,” observed Justice Ejaz Afzal. The premier’s lawyer, Makhdoom Ali Khan, also submitted timeline regarding various offices that Nawaz Sharif has held during his political career. The top court will take up the case on Friday (today) again whereby Naeem Bukhari, counsel for PTI, will conclude his arguments.