ISLAMABAD: Justice Ijazul Ahsan on Monday said the Supreme Court
bench was not bound to follow or implement the JIT report.
“The entire
country knows the JIT’s findings…we are not bound by them,” he remarked during
the arguments submitted by the counsel for the JI.“The counsel has to tell us
as to why we should implement the findings,” he said, adding, “Tell us to what
extent we can implement the suggestions of the JIT.”
The remarks
came as the counsels for the PTI and JI as well as Awami Muslim League chief
Sheikh Rasheed presented their arguments before the three-member bench to
disqualify Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on the basis of JIT’s findings in the
Panama Papers case. They concluded their arguments on Monday but asked the
court that they reserved the right of rebuttal.
The bench
said the statements would be considered under CrPC (Criminal Procedure Code),
adding that the Volume-X of the JIT report could also be opened, if
required.Naeem Bukhari, the counsel for PTI, pointed out parts of the report
and said in view of the UAE Ministry of Law’s letters, the JIT found Tariq
Shafi’s affidavits fake, which were submitted before the Supreme Court.
He said the
JIT had submitted the report and it was up to the court to draw a conclusion
whether the exercise made by the JIT was according to the parameters set by the
bench. He said the Sharif family’s assets exceeded the income and the JIT found
that Maryam Nawaz was the beneficial owner of the London flats.
Bukhari
requested the apex court to summon the prime minister for cross examination,
disqualify him from parliament and send cases against him and his family to an
accountability court.
Bukhari
termed the Qatari prince’s letter a concocted tale, adding that the London
properties had been in possession of the Sharif family since day one.He said
one of the respondents gave documents to the JIT. But when Justice Ijaz
inquired whether they were certified, the PTI counsel’s reply was in the
negative.
Bukhari
argued that the JIT wrote four letters to Qatari Prince Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
bin Jaber Al-Thani to record his statement but the royal family member’s
response was that he was not willing to accept the jurisdiction of Pakistani
law. The JIT stated in the report that it was not necessary to record his
statement, he added.
During the
proceedings, the counsel claimed that the Qatari prince’s letter proved to be
bogus.When Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan asked him whether the letter was bogus or
the story around that, he replied both were bogus.
Bukhari said
the JIT sought legal assistance from the UAE and found that the transaction of
12 million dirhams never took place.
He also
contended that it was claimed that the Gulf SteelMills were sold for 33 million
dirhams, which wasn’t the case and the Sharif family had been unable to clear
its position on the issue.
Taufeeq
Asif, representing JI chief Siraj-ul-Haq, said prima facie the case for disqualifying
the prime minister had been proved.
He read out
the portions of the report wherein the JIT discussed the inconsistencies in the
statements of witnesses. He said in his address to the Parliament, the prime
minister told a lie.
Sheikh
Rashid, in his arguments, said the respondents had not so far contradicted the
objections raised by the JIT report.
He said the
Sharif family’s wealth was accumulated during the period when they were in
power. “There is a face behind every case and the face is of the prime minister
in this case,” he remarked.
He lauded
the JIT for its efforts and said the six super heroes had completed their work
in 60 days, which could not be achieved in a year in ordinary circumstances. He
claimed that Saif-ur-Rehman and Sheikh Saeed were the mastermind of the
Sharifs’ corruption.
Later,
Khawaja Haris, the counsel for prime minister, commenced his arguments and told
the court that he had filed an application on behalf of his client, seeking
copy of Volume-X of the JIT report besides filing objections to the findings.
The court adjourned the hearing until today (Tuesday) wherein Khawaja Haris
will continue his arguments.
No comments:
Post a Comment