ISLAMABAD – The Supreme Court of Pakistan has adjourned hearing a slew of petitions seeking a probe into Panama Leaks till Tuesday while advising everyone to wait.
Jamaat-e-Islami continued its arguments before the larger bench regarding London flats and offshore companies of Sharif family.
JI’s counsel Touseef Asif kicked off his arguments by expressing that premier’s speech on the floor of the house was not part of the agenda for the day and so it was out of the jurisdiction of article 69 of the constitution.
Justice Azmat Saeed inquired whether the speaker of the National Assembly permitted the premier to deliver his speech or not and advised JI’s counsel to read article 69 and argue on the basis of that. He observed that JI’s counsel seemed addressing media more than the bench.
Justice Gulzar Ahmed also remarked that whether anyone objected to PM’s speech in parliament and whether it was expunged from session’s proceedings or not.
To this, Touseef Asif replied that Pm’s speech was still part of the proceedings and it was not expunged. He argued that the premier made the speech on Monday and the speaker of the assembly can only suspend routine business on Tuesday in order to give premier floor of the house for personal clarification.
He went on and sought to demand the record of assembly’s session for the particular day.
‘The premier initially vowed to clarify his position but whole of the scenario changed as the apex court took up the issue’ said Toufeeq Asif adding that Tariq Shafi was owner of Dubai mill.
Justice Azmat Saeed remarked that JI’s counsel was opposing his petition himself.
Justice Asif Khosa told the JI’s counsel to brief the larger bench regarding what the premier concealed in his statements adding that PM’s counsel argued that as the London flats were not owned by Nawaz Sharif so he could not present the money trail.
To this, Toufeeq replied that the premier did not present the money trail in his speech.
Justice Khosa remarked that the premier’s counsel did not present any evidence, rather he put forth legal points to argue before the bench.
JI’s counsel went on and expressed that the federal ministers were showing up in apex court to defend the prime minister.
Justice Asif Khosa remarked that the political leaders expressed their stance in road rallies and now everyone should wait for the judgement of larger bench.
Justice Aijaz Ul Ahsan told JI’s counsel to prove any connection of Nawaz Sharif with Mian Shareef’s business as Shareef family claimed that the actual owner of business was Mian Shareef.
He remarked that according to Nawaz Sharif, his name was not in Panama papers, so how could he be blamed for such Leaks.
Toufeeq Asif in his arguments also referred to the example of Ayyan Ali and Attiqa Odho case to which Justice Azmat quipped that he should decide whether he was representing Ayyan Ali or Attiqa Odho.
Meanwhile, talking to newsmen outside supreme court, PTI’s representative Fawad Chaudhry expressed that the ministers wanted to pressurise the media. He maintained that Salman Akram Raja, the counsel for Hussain Nawaz would have to clarify position regarding the exchange of gifts worth Rs. 520 million.
On the other hand, PML-N’s leader Ameer Muqam expressed that JI’s counsel wasted time of larger bench in the purview of Panama case. He slammed PTI supremo Imran Khan and JI chief Siral Ul Haq and inquired as to what both the leaders did for the betterment of Khyber Pukhtunkhwa province.
During the last hearing, JI’s lawyer Tauseef Asif stated that PM’s speech was an admittance of his crime. He said that PTI’s counsel gave his points regarding the conflict between different statements of premier Nawaz Sharif.
Tauseef Asif maintained that the premier admitted purchasing London flats between 1993 to 1996. He went on and said that the Sharif family set up steel mills in Dubai but kept quiet regarding the investment for that factory.
He reiterated that the premier was seeking immunity regarding the case while referring to Hazrat Umar’s example of clarifying his position for an extra piece of cloth. He said that even Yousaf Raza Gillani was disqualified by the apex court.
Justice Azmat Saeed remarked that JI was building an entirely different case from PTI as it was suggesting that there was ‘admittance rather than any conflict’ between the different statements of premier.
‘There was no evidence or document available suggesting any conflict of interest regarding the premier’ said Justice Azmat Saeed.
JI’s counsel referred to Zafar Ali Shah case but soon took back his arguments realising that he referred to arguments of lawyers instead of remarks of judges for that particular case.
Justice Gulzar instructed JI’s counsel to deal with the case seriously due to its pivotal nature. Justice Azmat categorically remarked that JI’s counsel lied in his application.
JI’s counsel continued his arguments and stated that Nawaz Sharif clarified his personal position regarding the allegations in his speech.
