Claims PM House ‘tutoring’ witnesses; SECP tampering with record; IB suspected to have found JIT member/family anti-govt Facebook comments; NAB continues proceedings against JIT member; law ministry delays issuance of notification; FBR not providing complete record
ISLAMABAD: In a really harsh tone, the JIT has issued a charge sheet against the PM House, Intelligence Bureau (IB), SECP, NAB, FBR, Law Ministry, etc, and alleged that the government machinery was being misused to hamper and hinder its investigations.
In its report submitted before the Supreme Court on Monday, the JIT mainly banked on its “analysis of technical means”, undisclosed “witnesses” and unnamed anonymous sources of information to level charges, some of which are of extremely serious nature and require an immediate inquiry.
Referring to “analysis of technical means”, the PM House is alleged of “tutoring” witnesses; referring to undisclosed witnesses, the SECP faces the serious charge of record tampering; IB is suspected to have found JIT member/family’s anti-government Facebook comments for the Sharifs; NAB is suspected of continuing disciplinary proceedings against a JIT member from Bureau to harm the JIT probe; Law Ministry is accused of delaying the issuance of notification sought by the JIT; and the FBR is alleged of not providing complete tax information sought.
The eight-page JIT report has over 100 pages of annexure, which contain minute details of media coverage including TV talkshows, hosts/guest comments, social media response about the JIT. However, not a single documentary evidence is attached to substantiate the serious allegations leveled against different government authorities in the same report.
Prime Minister’s House: The JIT report while referring to “the analysis of technical means” alleged that witnesses are being tutored by or at the behest of the respondents, confidential letters are being leaked by misusing the location of the PM’s House.
“The analysis of technical means indicate that Mr Haroon Pasha, the CEO of the Ittefaq Group, a close associate of the Respondent No1 (PM Nawaz Sharif), directed Mr Tariq Shafi, a witness in the matter, to come to the Prime Minister’s House before he would appear before the JIT. Mr Pasha specifically directed Mr Shafi that he needed to state before the JIT what he would be told at the Prime Minister’s House. This fact was corroborated by Mr Tariq Shafi before the JIT in subsequent sessions,” said the JIT report, without explaining who informed the JIT about what had transpired between Pasha and Shafi in private.
The report added, “Tutoring witnesses is in itself a criminal offence, the PM’s House and its sanctity is being undermined so as to coercively influence witnesses in the name of the PM’s House. The JIT report also noted that JIT’s summons, marked as confidential, for the Prime Minister was also leaked by the PM House. The JIT said, “Leak/public disclosure of 'confidential' letter/information is a crime in itself…”
Intelligence Bureau: The JIT report said that the role of IB during the course of its investigation by the JIT has been highly questionable. The JIT report referred to “background facts” to state that copies of CNICs of Bilal Rasul (JIT member) and Mian Azhar, which were attached with the application (before SC) of Husain Nawaz, were requisitioned from NADRA by IB. “Upon further checking, it has been revealed that the requisition was made by the IB from NADRA and the same was provided to the Respondent No7 (Hussain Nawaz),” said the report.
The JIT also referred to the screenshots from social media account of Bilal Rasul and his family. The JIT report suspects, “It is well known that a common man cannot have access to the Facebook account of another individual especially when privacy setting does not allow such access. Thus, the Facebook account of Mr Bilal Rasul, which is also used by his wife/family, was ostensibly hacked to retrieve the contents/documents attached with CMA 3687 by Respondent No7, without the consent of Mr Bilal Rasul or his family,” the report said, adding, “The private social media pages of their Facebook account were accessed by the Respondent No. 7 ostensibly through the facilitation of the IB.”
Although, the JIT used the word “ostensibly” to involve the IB into this affair, still it noted, “This is indeed an infringement of the privacy, but most importantly the entire episode confirms the blatant misuse of the governmental machinery so as to abusively support the Respondents.”
The report added that the field staff of IB was found loitering near the residence of one of the members of the JIT. “These officials, later on, visited his residence and adversely questioned the house keeper i.e. of the member of the JIT, causing fear and insecurity amongst the family members.”
Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP): The JIT report said that the SECP has forged and tampered some of the relevant record. The report said, “It has transpired during the examination of witnesses from the SECP by the JIT that the Chairman SECP Mr. Zafar Ul Haq Hijazi was instrumental in closing the investigation of money laundering case launched against Chaudhry Sugar Mills Limited (CSML). This investigation was commenced in the year 2011 but was closed in the year 2016, in back date with effect from 8-01-2013, at the sole behest of SECP’s Chairman as stated aforesaid. This act of backdated closure of investigation apart from being patently mala fide, is also a criminal act, with a view to facilitate the Respondents against whom the present investigation is being conducted.”
Regarding the source of this information, the report said, “It is needless to stress that the names of the witnesses who have divulged the backdated closure, cannot be disclosed, otherwise their safety and security would be fundamentally compromised and their lives and that of their respective families would be put under serious jeopardy.”
The report said that when concerned officer of the SECP sought permission from Commissioner to collect data of all inquiries initiated/pending against the Sharif family as officially asked by the JIT, the Commissioner quoting the Chairman directed to only restrict collection of the said inquiry reports from two local departments on the pleas of maintaining secrecy. “Hence a factually incorrect report based on incomplete information was forwarded, which has not been ratified till to date despite concerns expressed by the JIT.”
The JIT said that the possibility cannot be ruled out that any other inquiry may have been launched by the SECP, against companies owned by the Sharif family, other than the Chaudhry Sugar Mills.
The JIT report pointed out, “The orders of the chairman SECP to tamper the record and close Chaudhry Sugar Mills investigation of money laundering in back date, was executed by one Mr Ali Azeem Ikram, Executive Director, SECP. Incidentally, the report said Ali Azeem Ikram was initially nominated by SECP’s Chairman so as to be a member of the present JIT. It seems that the nomination of said Mr Ali Azeem Ikram to be member of the present JIT by the Chairman SECP had been made with a clear intent to subvert the investigation of the JIT.”
Referring to the WhatsApp call controversy, the JIT report said that the controversy was stirred at the behest of the Chairman SECP, attempting to “unmeritedly drag the learned Registrar of this Honourable Court, when in actual the learned Registrar, on his own volition, had no role in the manner”.
National Accountability Bureau: The JIT report said that the NAB is employing “under hand strategy” to overawe one member of the JIT. The report said Mr Irfan Naeem Mangi, a representative of the NAB in the JIT, has received a show cause notice dated 25-4-2017 by the NAB authorities in relation to the relevancy of his experience at the time of his induction, back in 2004.
In response, the report said, Mangi requested the NAB authorities to pend further proceeding with regard to the said show cause notice till the JIT proceedings were finalized. This request was most reasonable as Mr Mangi, a member of JIT, is presently constantly tied up with the investigation undertaken by the JIT, leaving himself with no time to consult the old record and draft/finalize a reply to the said show cause notice.
The report said that the NAB has directed Mangi to reply to the show cause notice within 15 days failing which an ex-parte decision would be taken against him. In JIT view, this is being done by NAB to distract Mangi from the JIT investigation besides “overawe him so that he is coerced and harassed”.
Law Ministry: The JIT report said the Law Ministry was requested on 18th May to issue and forward the notification to member countries of the UN Convention Against Corruption, notifying them the authorization of the Head of the present JIT under Section-21 of the NAB Ordinance, 1999. Despite reminders, the same was not acted upon by the Ministry of Law and ultimately the said notification was issued on 23rd May when the matter was brought to the notice of the SC.
The report said, “Indeed, the notification has now been issued but the delay in issuance of the notification speaks for itself and the manner in which, once again, the government machinery is being used so as to attempt to frustrate the proceedings of the JIT." The report said that despite the importance of the notification, the matter was intentionally lingered at the behest of the Ministry of Law.
Federal Bureau of Revenue: The report said, “The JIT requisitioned the income and wealth tax records and tax returns of the Respondents and their families from 1985 till date. While the FBR has not taken the plea that it is only required to maintain tax records for five years, it has submitted piecemeal, incomplete and selective records from 1985 till date. No plausible explanation has been given as to why a truncated set of records is being given. Once again this is a prime illustration as to how the government machinery is being employed so as to attempt to frustrate the JIT and its proceedings, which smacks of malice and mala fides in order to selectively omit such records which could undermine the Respondents case before the JIT and this Honourable Court.”
Threats: The JIT report said, “A segment of representatives, have intentionally threatened the members of the JIT, so also this Honourable Court, while ridiculing the JIT and attempting to arouse public sentiments.”
The report said, “The JIT is of the considered unanimous view that the government machinery is being misused to hamper ad hinder the investigation which is presently undertaken by the JIT upon the orders of this Honourable Court, and unless and until corrective orders are passed the situation would not be salvaged. Also that the vilification campaign has put the lives of JIT members and families in perpetual danger.”
