ISLAMABAD: The documents and assertions of the Sharif family, submitted to the Supreme Court, settle and answer an old question, vigorously raised by its leading detractors over the past several years, as to why its members had been using the Park Lane London flats much before Hussain purchased them in 2006, if they did not actually own them.
Paragraph 11 of the supplemental concise statement of Hussain, Maryam and Hassan says that on account of the longstanding business and personal relations of the ruling Al-Thani family of Qatar with late Mian Muhammad Sharif, Al-Thani family allowed Mian Sharif and his family to use the London properties whilst bearing all expenses relating to the apartments including the ground rent and service charges.
Almost the same was repeated in the letter that former prime minister and ex-foreign minister of Qatar Hamad bin Jassim bin Al Jaber Thani wrote for the Supreme Court. He stated that on account of relationship between the two families, Mian Sharif and his family used the London properties.
Referring to different press statements and TV interviews of key members of the Sharif family over the last one decade and a half, their political rivals had been stressing that they had been living in these properties for the simple reason that they owned them. They had also been claiming that the Sharif family was also the real owner of the two offshore companies linked to these apartments.
However, the concise statement made it clear as to who had been the proprietor of the London properties and the offshore companies. Its paragraph 11 also adds that flats Nos 16, 16a, 17 and 17a, Avenfield House, Park Lane, London were purchased by the Al-Thani family of Qatar and their ownership was secured through two companies, namely, Nielsen Enterprises Limited and Nescoll Limited, the bearer share certificates of which were kept by the Al-Thani family in Qatar.
Sheikh Hamad’s letter and the concise statement endorsed each other’s contents to justify the Sharif family’s claims about the flats and the offshore companies.
It is now for Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan to repudiate the contentions of Hussain, Maryam and Hassan on the basis of some credible documentary evidence. Mere hearsay and gossip he has been obsessed with throughout his prime political career will not serve his cause because whatever he furnishes to the apex court will be tested on touchstone of law and the Constitution.
However, by now it has been proved beyond an iota of doubt that Imran Khan has no proofs whatsoever to rebut the Sharif family’s claims. He just penned down his complaint and handed it over to the top court to collect evidence to investigate it. The entire onus of establishing that the London properties and the offshore companies were purchased by the legal, legitimate money has fallen on the shoulders of the Sharif family, which is the accused till proved innocent while the accuser is not playing his due role.
How the apex court described the voluminous proofs delivered by Imran Khan may be instructive for him and his tall claims of having capacious evidence to establish his case against the Sharif family. Resultantly, the whole proceedings at the Supreme Court or at the one-man judicial commission, if it was formed, are focused on the documents provided by the Sharif family.
The petitioner’s dilemma is that it has nothing in its possession to disprove the evidence provided to the court by Hussain, Maryam and Hassan. While hurling a barrage of allegations, Imran Khan had also visited London to collect the evidence and hire forensic experts, but all this was mere public statements and no worthwhile homework was ever done. Still he hopes that the Sharif family will be caught on the basis of the papers it has given or will provide to the apex court.
The Sharif family may deliver to the court more documents that the judicial forum would need for its satisfaction. Paragraph 16 of the concise statement indicates this possibility. It says Hussain, Maryam and Hassan seek leave and permission of the court to file such additional documents during the course of proceedings, as may be required, on account of any additional submission/document produced by any other party or for other assertions, if any, raised before the forum.
While the defendants emphasize that there is no contradiction or difference between the contents of the concise statement, Qatar Sheikh’s letter and the trust deed between Hussain and Maryam, and what Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said about the money trail in his speech to the National Assembly, it would obviously be a significant challenge for the premier and his children to convince the court about their claims. Whatever details the Sharif family has held for any reason may have to be divulged to the apex court to support their case.