D-day around the corner in Panama case

ISLAMABAD: The D-day is just around the corner after a lengthy battle in the Supreme Court on the petitions against Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his three children, Maryam, Hussain and Hassan, on account of offshore companies and London apartments.

The judgment of the five-member bench led by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa will have a far-reaching impact on the political landscape. This was indeed an outright political case for the mere fact that the main petitioner, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), is lethally opposed to the defendants and vice versa, and went to the court to get rid of or whittle down the popular power of his rival, the premier, through the judicial process after consistently failing to oust and outshine him in the political arena including repeated street agitations. However, it is not the judges’ concern who will lose and who will gain politically because of the verdict. 

The judges put pertinent questions to the chairmen of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), Qamar Zaman and Mohammad Irshad respectively, closely scrutinizing the action or non-action of their institutions on the scandal busted by the Panama Papers disclosures. The justices were apparently miffed with the performance of the two principal organizations. The FBR chief listed the steps taken by his institution, leaving the judges unsatisfied. The questioning of the two was wound up in only one day. What transpired in their responses was already public knowledge.

However, one point was brand new. When the bench asked Qamar Zaman whether or not he still intends to appeal against the quashing of the Hudabiya Paper Mills case by the Lahore High Court (LHC), decided four years back, he stood by his previous decision not to challenge it in the apex court. Obviously being displeased, the panel then warned him to be ready to face the consequences as the bench cannot force him to file appeal at this stage. Justice Khosa noted that the NAB did not attach weightage to the opinion of an LHC judge who had asked for reinvestigation in this case. He also observed that the NAB chairman could have looked into the Panama matter but didn’t. “I wish people who have such privilege could realize that they have a major responsibility.”

As the top court held lengthy proceedings, even a petitioner like Sheikh Rashid, who has no political power to fall back, has kept claiming that regardless of the decision of the highest judicial forum, the people’s court comprising 20 million people has spoken, handing down its ruling against Nawaz Sharif. A similar claim has been repeatedly articulated by Imran Khan. However, there is no manifestation from the masses that they have pronounced their decision against Nawaz Sharif. Elections are the only yardstick to measure the public support that always rejected the claims of the PTI, Sheikh Rashid and others against the prime minister.

Almost the entire case remained focused on the documents furnished by the Sharif family in its defence although the judges were not satisfied with its proofs in support of its claims. The other side, the PTI, plainly told the court that it has no papers to establish its accusations against the prime minister and his family members. Rather, he once told the justices that his job was only to level allegations and it was for the court to collect evidence.

The arguments advanced by the Jamaat-e-Islami lawyer were nothing but a disaster as he erroneously quoted even the basic details of the case law he referred to, and other facts. His assertions were hardly helpful to his client’s claims and did not damage the Sharif family’s stands even slightly.

A three-member strong squad of accomplished legal minds, representing the Sharif family, did the job well and tackled the case from different angles and raised critical points. How far they impressed the distinguished judges is a different story. They were to act as per the brief given to them by their clients. Makhdoom Ali Khan, who spoke for the prime minister, was par excellence. Salman Akram Raja, who stood for Hussain and Hassan, performed well. Shahid Hamid, who represented Maryam, did not lag behind.