ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) rejected the prosecutor’s request to adjourn the hearing of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf founder Imran Khan’s bail application in the 190- million-pound NAB case due to the lawyers’ strike on Thursday over the Lahore incident.
National Accountability Bureau’s prosecutor Amjad Pervez said he came from Lahore and lawyers were on strike because of the Lahore incident. He submitted that this is high-profile case which will be reported in the media, and appearing in the case despite the lawyers’ strike will be an embarrassment to him.
He submitted that the matter be fixed for another day with the consensus of the PTI founder’s lawyer and be proceeded with on a day-to-day basis. He further requested the court that the hearing be not conducted today.
Chief Justice Aamer Farooq remarked that what happened in Lahore yesterday is very unfortunate, but as judges we cannot endorse the protests. The court observed that the judiciary owns the legal fraternity, but the work has to go on and the hearing cannot be postponed due to the strike call.
Chief Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri heard the bail plea of the PTI founder in the 190-million-pound NAB reference.
NAB Special Prosecutor Amjad Pervez said that an assets recovery unit was created which reported directly to the prime minister and its office was also in the Prime Minister’s Secretariat. He submitted that a letter was written by the asset recovery unit to the National Crime Agency regarding money laundering cases.
The chief justice observed that the formation of the assets recovery unit has been examined in the Supreme Court case heard by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa. The NAB prosecutor said the Hyde Park property in the UK was bought from Hassan Nawaz.
Sardar Latif Khosa submitted that the prosecutor should inform the court whose son Hasan Nawaz is. The NAB prosecutor replied that everyone knows and no action was taken in respect of this property in the UK related to Hasan Nawaz. The chief justice observed that the assets recovery unit was formed by the prime minister and we are not questioning the legality of this institution but want to understand.
The NAB prosecutor said an offer of payment of a fine of Rs460 billion in seven years was made to the Supreme Court. The chief justice inquired as to whom the fine amount would be paid. The prosecutor replied that the money would be paid to the Sindh government. He said 458 kanals of land had been bought and transferred in the name of Zulfi Bukhari, and Al-Qadir Trust did not come into existence even after several months. He said that the value of the land was Rs66.6 million.He said the assets recovery unit was handling the money laundering cases and the land was shifted in the meantime. He said that Al-Qadir Trust had not yet been founded; perhaps, it had occurred in someone’s mind.
He submitted that there was consultation to register Al-Qadir Trust in a meeting after obtaining a land. He said Shahzad Akbar signed a secret deed to unfreeze money from the NCA, which was approved by the federal cabinet without seeing it (the deed).
He said the secret deed was signed by Shahzad Akbar on behalf of the federal cabinet with the National Crime Agency. The NCA had frozen the money.
Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri inquired why the NCA froze that amount. The NAB prosecutor said that NCA froze the money due to suspicion, and the money was later transferred to the Supreme Court account.
Justice Tariq Jahangiri inquired whether there is a certified copy of the money freezing order in the UK. The prosecutor said that there is no copy of the order but documents contain all the details of the incidents.
Justice Jahangiri then asked if there is a copy of the decision to unfreeze the money in the UK. The prosecutor replied in the negative and said that we do not have a copy of this order either.
The chief justice observed that the money came to the account of the Supreme Court in Pakistan. The prosecutor submitted that this is an illegal act. The chief justice observed that where something is illegal the prosecutor may explain but he wants to understand the facts.
The prosecutor was on his legs as the court time was over and the hearing has now been fixed for May 13.