LHC issues notice to NAB on Maryam’s bail petition

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Tuesday issued a notice to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on a petition of PML-N Vice President Maryam Nawaz, seeking post-arrest bail in the Chaudhry Sugar Mills case.

During a brief hearing, a two-judge bench asked Maryam’s counsel as to why he attached with the petition the copy of a decision in the case of Pakistan ambassador-at-large in US Ali Jahangir Siddiqui.

Advocate Amjad Pervez, the counsel, stated that he just wanted to explain that the NAB had no jurisdiction to investigate a matter relating to sale/purchase of a company’s shares after amendments in laws unless referred by the Security and Exchange Commission of Pakistan.

The bench observed that the case being cited by the counsel was disposed of after the NAB closed its inquiry. However, the bench comprising Justice Ali Baqar Najafi and Justice Sardar Ahmad Naeem adjourned the hearing and directed a special prosecutor of the NAB to submit a reply to the petition on October 14.

The NAB has accused Maryam of committing money laundering through investments of variable heavy amounts, being main shareholder of the mill. It said she was involved in money laundering with the help of some foreigners during the period of 1992-93 when her father Nawaz Sharif was prime minister. It was argued in the petition that all properties of the Sharif family, its business concerns and companies including the mill had already been thoroughly investigated by a JIT formed by the supreme court in the Panama Papers case. It said the SC had not directed the NAB to file any reference regarding the mill or assets owned by Maryam.

The petition argued that Section 9 (a) (v) of the National Accountability Ordinance 1999 envisaged a single offence, commission of which may result in acquisition of multiple assets or pecuniary resources by an accused person. But, it said, acquisition of each asset or pecuniary resource could not amount to a separate offence under the ordinance. The petition questioned the jurisdiction of the bureau’s chairman for approving the impugned inquiry under the Anti-Money Laundering Act 2010. Moreover, it said neither the petitioner nor co-suspect Abbas ever held any public office or remained dependent upon Nawaz Sharif. It argued that mischief of Section 9 (a) (v) of the NAO 1999 was not attracted in the case.