SC asks Imran to prove Sharifs owned flats before 2006

Observes proving ownership of companies is PTI’s responsibility and dates are important in this regard; seeks record to see when Nawaz assumed key govt offices and when he was exiled; questions raised in hearing should not be subject of media discussions

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday asked the counsel for Chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Imran Khan to prove that the Sharif family owned the Mayfair flats before 2006.

It observed that proving the ownership of companies is the PTI’s responsibility and dates are important in this regard. It also asked the PTI counsel to prove that the money invested into his children’s business came from the personal account of premier Nawaz Sharif.

A new five-member larger bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and comprising Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh and Justice Ijaz Ahsen, resumed hearing the petitions filed by the PTI, Jamaat-e-Islami, Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed and advocate Tariq Asad, seeking a probe in the PanamaLeaks.

The court asked two important questions from the PTI counsel Naeem Bukhari and Makhdoom Ali Khan, the new counsel of premier Nawaz Sharif. Justice Ijaz Afzal Khan, a new member of the bench, asked Naeem Bukhari to prove that the money was in the personal account of premier Nawaz Sharif which was invested in his children’s business.

“You have to prove to us that all the money and assets were in the personal account of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and then you will have a relevant case, otherwise it will be again a wild goose chase,” Justice Ijaz Afzal Khan asked the PTI counsel.

Similarly, Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa asked Makhdoom Ali Khan to provide details of when Nawaz Sharif became the finance minister, chief minister and was twice elected as the prime minister and for what period he remained outside the country on exile. 

Justice Khosa asked the learned counsel that there was a conflict of interest, that’s why they were asking these questions because these would be relevant as to how the prime minister used his official position. Makhdoom Ali Khan replied that he would comply with the order of the court. 

Justice Khosa said that they (Sharif family) went to Saudi Arabia in December 2000 and they were told that 12 million Dirhams remained parked somewhere for twodecades and were available for investment in Jeddah. He said that there was a gap of two decades adding that the investment went to Qatar and then moved back to Jeddah.

It is for the person having the knowledge to explain things under Section 122 of Qanoon-e-Shahadat, said Justice Khosa. Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed questioned the PTI counsel as to what was the law in Dubai at the time the Sharif family transferred the money. 

Justice Ejaz Afzal asked the counsel as to whether a violation of law in Dubai will have implication in Pakistan questioning as to whether the prime minister committed any offence.

Naeem Bukhari contended that prime minister has stated he invested 12 million Dirhams to set up a mill in Jeddah but he did not say that he took the investment later to Qatar and there was no money trail. 

The learned counsel contended they know that they brought properties in London but the Qatari letter said that they invested in Al-Thanni in Qatar.

Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa said that the elder Sharif died in 2004 while properties of the family were settled in 2006 and there had to be certain will or court decree whereby it was stated that the assets will go automatically to grandson.

Naeem Bukhari pleaded the court to issue a notice to Punjab Chief Minister Mian Shahbaz Sharif so that he could come and explain as to how 34 million pounds was arranged to satisfy the judgment of Altoufiq Case before the London Court. However, the bench observed that the CM Punjab was not made a party in the case. 

Naeem Bukhari further said that the statement made by the PM in his address to the nation on April 5 and then on May 16 on the floor of parliament that the Gulf Steel Mills was sold out for 33 million Dirhams was wrong.

Referring to the prime minister’s speech to the nation on April 5, Naeem Bukhari contended that the PM stated he had evidence of his investments in Dubai and Saudi Arabia. Bukhari said that the prime minister had lied; therefore, he was neither Sadiq nor Ameen (truthful and trustworthy), and should be disqualified. He said that the speeches of the prime minister were contradicted by his children in their respective statements. 

Meanwhile, Justice Asif Saeed Khosa said that the hearing will be conducted on a daily basis. He asked Naeem Bukhari to plead the case in the court and not in the media. Naeem Bukhari replied that he had never talked about the case to the media. 

During the course of hearing, Imran Khan told the bench that they were forced to hold press conferences adding that their press conferences should not be considered a pressure tactic on the courts. 

Elaborating his point, the PTI chief said that the government uses its platform to say that the PTI has not given evidence. Therefore, he said they have to hold press conferences.

He said that the job of the opposition is to level allegations while it was the job of the government to prove itself not guilty. He said that they have got eight million votes and their job was to raise their voice against corruption and wrongdoings.

Justice Asif Aseed Khan Khosa observed that they don’t want to impose any legal or constitutional restrictions on anybody but the observations and questions raised by the court should not be made basis for media discussions. Meanwhile, the court adjourned the hearing until today (Thursday) whereby Naeeem Bukhari will continue his arguments.