Fake accounts case

SC to hear review petitions of Zardari, Bilawal, Faryal, Murad

By Sohail Khan

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court will take up review petitions filed by former president Asif Ali Zardari, his son Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, sister Faryal Talpur and Sindh Chief Minister Murad Ali Shah in the fake accounts case on Monday.

A three-member special bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa and comprising Justice Faisal Arab and Justice Ijazul Ahsan will hear these review petitions on February 18 at 1:00 pm. The bench will also hear the review petitions filed by the owner of Omni Group Anwar Majeed as well as the Sindh government.

Last month, the former president and his sister Faryal Talpur had filed a review petition in the Supreme Court requesting it to recall its order passed on January 7 in the money laundering case saying the directions issued in the impugned order are prejudicial to them in any futuristic eventualities of a fair trial and due process will not be possible under Article 10(A) of the Constitution.

Similarly, the PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari while filing a review petition had questioned the verbal and written order passed by former chief justice Mian Saqib Nisar in fake bank accounts and money laundering case pertaining to removal of his name as well as chief minister Sindh form the JIT report and Exit Control List (ECL). He had prayed the court to review its written order which, in contrast to its verbal order earlier, does not mention removal of his name from the JIT report.

He had submitted that on January 7, 2019, the former chief justice while heading a three-member bench of the apex court hearing the fake bank accounts and money laundering case had expressed displeasure against the JIT and the federal government and verbally directed them to expunge his name from the JIT report and form the ECL.

He said this direction of the chief justice was made in the open court and was widely reported in the media and no contradiction or clarification to the contrary was ever issued by anyone in respect of these facts. However, he said the verbal directions were not implemented. He said that eventually when the written order was issued, the direction for expunging his name from the JIT report was also not part of the order.