Jago Times "English Edition" Best Online Newspaper
Related Articles
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) is hearing PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif’s petition against his conviction in the Al-Azizia reference.
A division bench comprising IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb is conducting the proceedings. The same bench had acquitted the PML-N leader in the Avenfield reference on November 29.
The Al-Azizia Steel Mills corruption reference pertains to a case in which he was sentenced to seven years in jail on Dec 24, 2018. He was also fined Rs1.5 billion and US$25 million.
The reference pertains to the Sharifs being unable to justify the source of the funds provided to set up Al-Azizia Steel Mills and Hill Metal Establishment (HME) in Saudi Arabia.
The IHC had declared him a proclaimed offender in the case in December 2020. After leaving for London on medical grounds, Nawaz remained there for nearly four years and only returned to the country in October this year.
Soon after his return, Nawaz had formally filed two separate applications seeking restoration of his appeals against the conviction in the Avenfield Apartments and Al-Azizia references.
In the applications, the PML-N supreme leader had said that while he was abroad for medical treatment, the pending appeals were dismissed for non-prosecution. The applications requested the court to revive the pending appeals to decide on these pleas on merit.
The IHC had on Oct 24 revived Nawaz’s appeals in the two references.
Along with acquitting Nawaz in the Avenfield reference on Nov 29, the IHC had also dismissed an appeal filed by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) against Nawaz’s acquittal in the Flagship Investment reference.
The difference between the Al-Azizia and Flagship Investment references was that in the former, the prosecution brought on judicial record that Nawaz allegedly received $10.2 million and 1.26m euros from his son Hussain Nawaz from the Hill Metal Establishment, whereas no such amount was remitted in his name from the Flagship Investment and other companies owned by Hassan Nawaz in the UK.
The hearing
Ahead of the hearing today, Nawaz arrived at IHC along with senior PML-N leaders Ishaq Dar, Azam Nazeer Tarar and others.
As the proceedings commenced, PML-N lawyer Amjad Pervaiz said his client’s appeal was against the Dec 2018 verdict in the Al-Azizia Reference.
Justice Farooq inquired if the case was linked to the Panama Papers to which Pervaiz replied in the affirmative. The lawyer said three references were filed in the Panama cases: Al-Azizia, Avenfield and Flagship Investment references.
“An accountability court had acquitted Nawaz in the Flagship reference,” he recalled, adding that the aforementioned three references were the outcome of one Supreme Court judgment.
Elaborating Nawaz’s appeal, the lawyer contended that a single reference should have been filed against the PML-N leader as all the three references mentioned accusations of holding assets beyond means.
In Al-Azizia reference, Pervaiz continued, there were a total of 22 witnesses of which 13 had recorded their testimonies. However, none of them were eyewitnesses, he highlighted.
“In this case, only Wajid Zia and Mehboob Alam are lead witnesses,” the PML-N counsel added.
Here, the IHC CJ inquired about the charges in the said reference. “Assets beyond means,” Pervaiz replied, pointing out that the Al-Azizia Steel Company Private Limited was registered in Saudi Arabia in 2001.
He went on to say that the Hill Metal Establishment was established in Jeddah in 2005-2006, which is owned by PML-N supremo’s son Hussain Nawaz. “It is a well-established fact that the Hill Metal Establishment was set up after selling Al-Azizia company,” he contended.
But the NAB alleged that these were benaami [unnamed] companies of Nawaz Sharif, the lawyer said, arguing that the PML-N leader had nothing to do with the bank accounts or operations of the companies.
He highlighted that the ages of Nawaz’s children in Avenfield reference were less than 18 but Hussain Nawaz’s age mentioned in the Al-Azizia reference was 28 years. The PML-N counsel further stated that the lead witnesses could not prove that Hussain was under the patronage of his father.
Pervaiz recalled that Nawaz was not a public office holder from Oct 1999 till May 2013.
At one point during the hearing, NAB prosecutor brought up the video scandal surrounding former accountability judge Arshad Malik and asked the court to first look at petition pertaining to that.
At that, Justice Aurangzeb said it was up to the petitioner if he wanted to pursue the matter as petitions pertaining to the same were filed in the court. “We can set up a screen here and play the video,” he stated.
But don’t forget this can also become a “double-edged sword”, the judge warned.
However, the PML-N counsel said his client did not want to press the matter. Pervaiz then read out loud the SC judgment in the Panama Papers case.
“We have two options after the SC verdict. First is that we call for evidence ourselves and decide the case on merit. Second is that we remand the reference back to the accountability court,” the IHC CJ said.
Meanwhile, Justice Aurangzeb highlighted that even if the case was sent back to accountability court, Nawaz Sharif would be considered accused, not convicted.