ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court observed on Friday that it was yet to be established whether the Sharifs owned their London properties before 2006. Referring to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s interviews, Justice Asif Saeed Khosa observed that the PM continued to do business and politics together till 1997. Justice Khosa, who is heading a five-judge larger bench of the apex court in Panamagate case, told Jamaat-e-Islami counsel Taufiq Asif that unless the conflict of interest was established mere allegations of the premier’s involvement in business would not take the petitioner anywhere. Justice Ijazul Ahsan asked the JI counsel whether there was any code of conduct prohibiting the prime minister from partaking in business activities while remaining in office. When the JI lawyer read the prime minister’s speech in the Parliament, Justice Ijaz remarked the PM would address it on the floor of house, adding that explanations on personal allegations against the premier could be demanded there. When the counsel referred to the Zafar Ali Shah case judgment, Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan observed that this was a submission by the AGP that could not be used against the Sharifs. Another judge, Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh told the JI counsel that they could not deliver a verdict based on assumptions. A five-member larger bench of Supreme Court of Pakistan (SCP) resumed hearing the Panama Leaks case on Friday. Jamat-e-Islami counsel Taufiq Asif pleaded that Nawaz Sharif stands disqualified because he hide London properties and his speech in the National Assembly can be used as an evidence against him. Beginning his arguments in the much-debated Panama Leaks case, the JI lawyer said that the speech made by the prime minister on the Floor of the House was contradictory as the details later shared by the Sharif Family lawyers differ from the contents of the speech. This statement should be taken as a confession and evidence against the prime minister, he argued. The counsel said the prime minister had shared the details about family businesses and the financial resources used to purchase London flats. On this, Justice Khosa remarked that here we have two questions, when the flats were purchased and their link with Nawaz Sharif? Although they admitted that they own the property but not that the PM purchased these flats, he observed. Referring to Zafar Ali Shah case, Taufiq Asif pointed out that London flats were also mentioned in this case. When Justice Azmat Saeed questioned whether Nawaz Sharif was a party in the case, the lawyer replied in affirmative. At this point, PM’s lawyer Makhdoom Ali Khan intervened and clarified that Nawaz Sharif was not the party in that case and the JI lawyer retracted his comments regarding it.
Reprimanding JI lawyer, Justice Gulzar said you should not be taking this case in a non-serious manner.
The hearing was later adjourned till Monday. amaat-e-Islami (JI) lawyer Taufeeq Asif on Friday recorded arguments in Supreme Court (SC) and said that Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif has violated oath by concealing the assets. A five-member larger bench headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa resumed the hearing of Panama Papers case. Other judges in the bench include Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed and Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan. During the hearing, JI lawyer said that Sharif family’s assets grew manifold in the reign of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N). The court asked: “Is there any rule that prohibits PM from having own business? If not, then why you are dragging the court on just assumptionsâ€. The counsel replied that there is no such embargo.
