Daily Times

ISLAMABAD: A larger bench of the Supreme Court constituted by newly appointed Chief Justice of Pakistan Mian Saqib Nisar on Wednesday resumed proceedings into the Panamagate case and decided that hearings in the case will take place on a daily basis.

The bench headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, while taking up identical petitions relating to Panamagate, observed that the court will not leave anything unheard and will hear the case without any further adjournments.

In order to examine the allegations of money laundering leveled against Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in the wake of revelations by Panama Papers, the Supreme Court sought the details of dates and time periods in which Nawaz acted as minister on different portfolios as well as in exile. “It is relevant to question as to how he (allegedly) used his official position. We are asking because conflict of interest is involved in it,” Justice Asif Saeed Khosa observed.

Justice Khosa further observed that in some interviews to media, the prime minister said that he parted himself from business in 1997, which means he was carrying out business while holding the office as well.

During the course of the proceedings, which continued for more than four hours, the bench raised questions over wealth resources revealed by the prime minister and his family on different forums including media and parliament for purchase of properties in London.

Naeem Bukhari, representing Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), referred to the PM’s April 5 speech to nation through the state-run television and May 16 speech in parliament. “At no point, any reference was made about investment in Qatar,” Naeem argued, saying the PM in his speeches only addressed the entities in Jeddah and Dubai. “It is a misstatement and false assertion,” he said, adding that PM lied to the nation as well as parliament. “Therefore, he is no more Sadiq and Ameen and is liable to be disqualified.”

“If it is an admission then we shall consider the illegality,” Justice Ejaz Afzal, another member of bench, observed. “You (PTI’s counsel) have to prove that all money was in the account of Respondent No 1 (PM) then you will have relevancy to the case otherwise it will again be like groping in the dark,” Justice Afzal further observed.

“At the end of the day, we will seek assistance from some counsel on what statement constitutes disqualification under Sadiq and Ameen clause,” observed Justice Sh Azmat Saeed, another member of the bench.

Bukhari argued that no money trail of transactions from Jeddah, Dubai and Qatar is available, claiming the amounts were shifted in bags from Pakistan. The court also inquired about laws in Dubai at the time of these transactions as well as implication of those laws in Pakistan.

Regarding the transfer of property from the name of late Mian Sharif, PM’s father, to grandsons Hassan and Hussain Nawaz, Justice Khosa observed that the elder Sharif died in 2004 but settlement of properties was done in 2006, adding there must be a will or a court decree to justify transfer of assets directly to the grandsons. Bukhari said that no such will is in his knowledge and that Sharif family did it out of their own wish only.

The court also directed politicians from ruling as well as opposition parties not to hold media talks in the premises of the court. Justice Khosa, in an apparent reference to talk shows, observed that they don’t want to impose any legal or constitutional restriction on anybody but the observations and questions raised by the court should not be made basis for discussions as these questions are tentative in nature.

PTI chief Imran Khan personally appeared before the bench and maintained that that they are forced to hold press conferences. He stated that their press conferences should not be considered a pressure tactic. Elaborating his point, Imran said that in the case of judicial commission constituted to probe rigging in 2013 elections, the government would use its official platform to maneuver public opinion that PTI had failed to provide any evidence on rigging. Therefore, he said, in response his party was forced to hold press conferences.

He said the job of the opposition is to level allegations while it was the duty of the government to prove not guilty. The court, later, adjourned the hearing for Thursday (today).