Doubts have cropped up in people’s minds
No clean chit has been given to PM Nawaz Sharif and his two sons. It will adversely affect his politics. Now, a ‘minus-one’ movement will start against him
Things have started to fall apart, even though the center is there. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif remains PM. That hasn’t changed; rather that is the only thing that hasn’t changed in the wake of a majority judgment handed down to him by a divided bench in the Panamagate verdict that has dissent notes by two future chief justices, Justice Asif Saeed Khosa and Justice Gulzar Ahmed.
Will center keep things from falling apart or, this time, will the center itself fall apart? DNA sat down with notable lawyer, politician, former senator and human rights activist SM Zafar to talk out the possible implications of the verdict on the country’s future.
SM Zafar has served as a judge of the high court and as Pakistan’s minister for law and parliamentary affairs. He is chancellor of Hamdard University and Chairman of Human Rights Society of Pakistan. Mr Zafar’s efforts for recognition and promotion of human rights and fair practices have attained him acclaim and acknowledgment on national and international levels. In his capacity as an attorney, Mr Zafar has been involved in some of the most important cases of the country’s legal history and is considered an authority on legal and constitutional issues and his opinions are quoted in national and international press.
Question: How do you see the future course of Panamagate case as it is still far from over? Will it be the last nail in the coffin of the Sharif dynasty or they’ll manage to wriggle out of it like they used to in the past?
SM Zafar: All five judges have made up their minds about one thing that Mian Nawaz Sharif and both his sons, Hassan and Hussain Nawaz, have committed some kind of corruption. They haven’t given them a clean chit at all. Two of the judges have gone very far and wrote that in their eyes the PM has been proved dishonest beyond doubt. The remaining three judges have said that because they have to decide this question in light of Qanoon-e-Shahadat and constitution, the evidence submitted so far is not sufficient to help them reach the same conclusion.
If seen from this angle, no clean chit has been given to PM Nawaz Sharif and his two sons. It will adversely affect his politics. Now, a ‘minus-one’ movement will start against him. Our country has numerous examples of minus-one movements in the past. The results of these movements have been bizarre and unusual in our country. At times they succeeded, at other times they led to more failures. The minus-one movement against Ayub Khan led to another martial law regime and that movement failed disastrously.
Mian Nawaz Shairf and his party have to think of a political solution, otherwise the movement will gain momentum with every passing day.
Q: The much awaited Panamagate Verdict has arrived. Although a majority decision, two judges have written dissent notes, both future CJs, what significance does their dissent hold?
SMZ: There is no hindrance for both judges, Justice Asif Saeed Khosa and Justice Gulzar Ahmed, to become chief justice as it is written in the constitution that the senior most judge will be the CJ. No one’s discretion is involved in elevating a justice to chief justice. So, according to the constitution, these Judges are out of harm’s way and can’t be hampered from becoming chief justice. The CJ is one amongst the equals. All judges are considered equal as far as decisions are concerned. A chief justice alone cannot enforce his decisions. Yes if he manages to get other judges by his side, then he can manage the reviews, but till then the date of review of Panama verdict would have lapsed.
Q: Both parties, opposition and government, celebrated the verdict with much fanfare. Who do you think has surfaced as a winner and who stands to lose?
SMZ: The loser of the verdict is image of Pakistan. And as far as the parties are concerned they both have reasons to celebrate and eat mithai. Both parties can look at the decision from their standpoint and both can beat drums of their win.
The loser of the verdict is image of Pakistan. And as far as the parties are concerned they both have reasons to celebrate and eat mithai. Both parties can look at the decision from their standpoint and both can beat drums of their win
Q: With no mention of Ishaq Dar, Maryam Nawaz and Captain Safdar in the order of the court, which is termed as the operative part, have they been given a clean chit by SC and what does the verdict says about beneficial ownership of Maryam Nawaz?
SMZ: Maryam Nawaz has indeed been given a clean chit. In the detailed decision there are references to her that she is not a dependent of Nawaz Sharif and have cleared her to the extent that there is no need to call her for investigation or initiate action against her. Since I haven’t been able yet to read the whole judgment as it comprises more than 500 pages so I won’t be able to comment on Ishaq Dar and Captain Safdar’s positions. The court has told that it’ll only see who is the owner in its verdict.
Q: The representatives from ISI and MI have been included in the JIT, while Intelligence Bureau (IB) has been left out. What’s the reason of leaving out foremost civil intelligence agency? And how does this JIT from a Judicial commission?
SMZ: All we have before us is the reasons the judges have given. It is said IB at present is directly under influence of the prime minister himself. Perhaps on the basis of such doubts they’ve kept IB away.
A judicial commission is formed under a judge’s administration. But judges don’t have the personality to investigate; they can’t go and search for documents on their own. A Judge can conduct an inquiry. If a Commission was formed it would’ve needed assistance from institutions like NAB, FIA, SECP. So, they’ve decided to form a Joint Investigation team instead.
Q: SC has time and again observed the politicisation of NAB, FIA, State Bank and other civil institutions. However, the members of the JIT will come from these very institutions. Will these be able to swim against the tide and work independently without paying heed to their high ups?
SMZ: The hope SC has is the report they are asking to be submitted every two weeks. The judges will be able to maintain checks on the Joint Investigation Team and its members won’t try to subvert the findings and the probe. It’ll also ensure that no concession is extended to the government in any respect. On this premise they’ve added NAB, SECP, FIA, and State Bank. Furthermore, they have added MI and ISI, two institutions on which PM has no influence whatsoever.
It would have been better if all judges arrived at the same position, but since it didn’t happen many doubts have cropped up in people’s minds.
