‘JIT deliberately avoided evidence in favour of accused’

ISLAMABAD: In Avenfield apartments corruption reference, legal counsel for Maryam Nawaz while referring to some documents tried to establish Friday that the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) formed in Panama Papers case deliberately avoided the evidence that was in favour of the accused.

The JIT neither investigated Dibb Lupton Broomhead nor Lawrence Radley and neither a maintenance company ‘Arena’ that could potentially prove that Maryam Nawaz had no connection whatsoever with the Avenfield properties. Legal counsel for Maryam Nawaz, Amjad Pervez Advocate suggested that the JIT wilfully with malafide intention did not investigate the said persons or companies to falsely implicate his client.

Wajid Zia refuted this allegation and said that it is incorrect. Wajid Zia admitted that the JIT could not gather any record that who was administering secretarial administration of Nescoll and Neilsen since their incorporation in January 2006 and also no information was found that from 1993 to 1996, since the time of purchase of the flats, which companies were either managing or maintaining the Avenfield apartments.

Mian Nawaz Sharif and Maryam Nawaz did not appear before the Accountability Court Friday due to security reasons amid protests of Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan. The counsel for Maryam Nawaz also submitted a police report (security certificate) where the former premier and his daughter have been advised to restrict their movement. In this connection, the AC granted exemption applications of Nawaz and Maryam. However, Captain (R) Muhammad Safdar appeared before the court.

Wajid Zia admitted before the Accountability Court that Maryam had no role in the incorporation of two British Virgin Islands (BVI) companies Nielsen and Nescoll who owned the Avenfield apartments.

Maryam's counsel started cross-examination on Wajid Zia in Avenfield apartments corruption reference with the question that who was owner of the London flats prior Nielsen and Nescoll. Zia replied that the JIT did not investigate this.

Amjad Pervez said that as per land registry official title of register Avenfield apartments 17 and 17-A were registered under the proprietorship of Nescoll Enterprises C/O Dibb Lupton Broomhead in 1993 & 1996, while flats 16 and 16-A were registered under the proprietorship of Nielsen C/O Dibb Lupton Broomhead on July 31, 1995.

Amjad Pervez also confronted Zia with a letter of Lawrence Radley that he had written to Nawaz Sharif’s counsel in the Supreme Court, Salman Akram Raja. In the letter, Radley said, “I can confirm that I acted on behalf of the purchasers of the Avenfield apartments around 1993 to 1996. The properties were purchased through two BVI companies Nielsen and Nescoll and my instructions to purchase the properties were not provided by any member of Sharif family.” Amjad Pervez then questioned Zia that did the JIT investigate Lawrence Radley? Zia said the JIT decided not to associate Radley in its investigation because the letter clearly states that the flats were purchased through two offshore companies. Purchase through offshore companies was devised to maintain anonymity, Zia said. Amjad Pervez then questioned Zia that did the JIT mention this reason in any of 10 volumes of the report, to which Zia replied in the negative. Zia said the JIT neither mentioned this letter in its report nor even attached it.

Amjad Pervez said Lawrance Radley had written letter to Salman Akram Raja in response to a letter dated January 13, 2017. In the letter written to Radley, it was said that he (Radley) being a partner of Dibb Lupton Broomhead was responsible for the canvassing with the proprietors. Radley was asked that on whose behalf and instruction he acted upon for the purchase of Avenfield apartments. Going through the letter, Zia agreed that this letter was not part of the JIT report. Amjad Pervez then posed another question that did the JIT collect any evidence that may establish that Maryam Nawaz had any role in the incorporation of Neilsen and Nescoll? In reply, Zia said no such evidence was collected. However, the certification by the BVI authorities of the correspondence between financial investigation agencies (FIA of BVI) and Mosaic Fonseca establishes link of Maryam Nawaz with Minervathat is documented through a letter dated December 5, 2005. Zia said that when Nescoll and Neilsen were owned through bearer shares certificates at the time of incorporation, these shares were issued and therefore there is documentary evidence to connect Maryam Nawaz with Nescoll enterprises and Nielsen Limited.

Responding to some other questions, Wajid Zia said the JIT also took into its possession the incorporation record of Nescoll and Neilsen. He admitted that the incorporation record neither show any involvement of Maryam Nawaz nor any accused or witness during the JIT investigation stated that Maryam had any role whatsoever. As per BVI letter, also Maryam has no role in the incorporation, Zia admitted. When confronted with the BVI letter dated December 5, 2005, Zia admitted that it has nothing to do with the incorporation of Neilsen and Nescoll.

Maryam’s counsel then confronted Zia with a letter of company ‘Arena’ written to Hussain Nawaz where the company thanked him for acquiring management services. To a question that did the JIT investigate Arena, Zia said the investigation team decided not to investigate Arena because it was a service providing company for the properties and it had nothing to do with the ownership of Nielsen and Nescoll. He said Arena’s letter was not part of the JIT report but it was separately submitted before the Supreme Court.

Amjad Pervez said Arena was not service provider but it was management company that liaise on behalf of Hussain Nawaz with the service providing companies. He then questioned Zia that when bearer shares certificates for Nielsen and Nescoll were cancelled and registered shares were bought, to which Zia replied that it was on July 4, 2006 and registered shares were issued in the name of Minerva.

Further hearing in this matter will be tomorrow (Monday).