Much heat, little light

After 25 hearings      in 126 days, the Supreme Court proceedings into the Panama Papers leaks have finally come to a close. But the ultimate verdict is still uncertain as the court decided to reserve the verdict until it has time to study the copious documentation submitted by both sides. The judges have stressed that judgements are made not on the basis of political popularity but solely on the merits of the legal points placed before them. All we know right now, as Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed said, is that the verdict will be in accordance with the principles of justice and the law no matter how many people it might please or displease. Trying to read the tea leaves is a difficult task, but the Supreme Court’s decision to reserve its judgement shows that the matter will not be an easy one to adjudicate. There is a chance the bench could decide that further investigation is needed leading it to form a commission, after which it could review the case again. Or it could even say that the evidence shows that, while there may be a case to be made, it has not been proven beyond any doubt. Experts believe that in such a scenario it is possible that the case is referred to the Election Commission of Pakistan – for an examination of assets belonging to politicians who stand at the heart of the case, or further investigation into key matters may be ordered.

Right now, both sides are bullish about their prospects, with the PTI in particular sensing victory at hand because of the Supreme Court’s     criticisms of the National Accountability Bureau. Both sides, however, have been taken to task by the judges for submitting documentation that does not stand up to scrutiny and the judges have grilled lawyers from both sides over their failures and the apparently frivolous manner in which some key matters have been handled. The bottom line then is that neither side has given a good account of itself while attempts to politicise the case continued – with mini press conferences held by leaders of political parties after virtually every hearing. Ultimately, this rollercoaster of a case, which brought lots of heat but very little light with its revolving cast of lawyers and politicians who turned the proceedings into a media circus,   will hinge on the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the matter.        It is vital then that it be handled with care and without any attempt to create sensationalism.