SC to review material before any decision in Panama case

• Justice Ejaz says judges to not look at JIT’s opinion, but to take into consideration report’s content
• Justice Azmat asks PM’s counsel to present evidence if they have objections to JIT
• Haris points out question on assets, says JIT went on to seek answers of 15 questions instead of original 13

Advocate Khawaja Haris Ahmed, counsel for Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in the Panama case, on Tuesday resumed his arguments in the case, saying that the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) opinion did not have a legal holding.

A three-member Supreme Court bench headed by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan and comprising Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed and Justice Ijazul Ahsan heard the Panama case. During the proceedings, Khawaja Harris objected over the findings of the JIT report and termed it unreliable and misleading.

He told the court that the documents submitted on behalf of the Sharif family on Monday were based on legal objections. Justice Ejaz replied that the judges would not look at JIT’s opinion, but instead, they would take into consideration the contents of the report.

Haris maintained that the prime minister was detached from all family businesses and didn’t participate in the family’s property distribution in 2007. The prime minister was involved in the business only until 1985, he added. He said that if there were any assets other than the ones declared in the prime minister’s tax returns, his client would answer all questions regarding them.

“If you have objections to the JIT, then you also have to present evidence,” Justice Azmat Saeed told the counsel. Haris argued that the JIT did not have the mandate to recommend reopening of cases, yet, in its final report, the team had recommended to reopen 15 cases against the prime minister.

Among the 15 cases, five have already been decided by the Lahore High Court (LHC). “The JIT has also mentioned those cases that have already been quashed,” Haris said asserting the LHC decided upon the Hudaibiya Paper Mills reference as well. He said that the JIT had exceeded its mandate and asked 15 questions instead of 13.

Justice Azmat remarked that the court wanted to see the answers to the questions it had put forward. Addressing the bench, Khawaja Haris read out 13 questions, given by the Supreme Court to the JIT. He said that the court in its April 20 judgment had not ordered reopening of any case against Nawaz Sharif.

He said that the JIT included a question on assets beyond means and went on to seek answers of 15 questions instead of the original 13. Haris said that it was not the mandate of JIT to give a verdict. On this Justice Azmat remarked that if the JIT made recommendations after its investigation, then what was wrong with it. The order of the court will be more important than the JIT’s recommendations, he observed.

Advocate Haris faced a flurry of questions and scathing remarks from the bench, especially from Justice Ijazul Ahsan who remarked at one point that Sharif family was given ample opportunity to answer the queries and present their case before the JIT. “They thought that they have to answer nobody or have to admit nothing. Let JIT do whatever it has to do,’ he remarked adding that when PM was asked about London flats he didn’t know that and even refused to recognize his uncle.”

Khawaja Haris said that his client neither owned any offshore company nor withdrew any salary from such a company. He claimed that the JIT probe was not transparent as his client was not asked to verify the documents. He also claimed that several questions not posed to the prime minister, were also included in JIT report and it should be probed that why he was not given chance to confront documents against his client. Upon this, Justice Azmat remarked that the defence counsel could submit a separate application to the apex court in this regard.

Haris argued that the documents had not been verified by the relevant Pakistani embassy and therefore could not be considered authentic. He reiterated that the foreign government has to be involved in any Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) request.

During the hearing, Justice Ijaz remarked that many affairs were interrelated in the case and can’t be separated. “The JIT was formed to dig out the money trail and see for where the money came from.” The court has also hinted upon the idea of making Volume X of JIT report public that deals with Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) with foreign countries and JIT head Wajid Zia had asked the court not to make it public since the process is ongoing.

During the fag end of Tuesday’s hearing, Justice Ijaz remarked that PM Nawaz should’ve given the record of documents to JIT, as he hasn’t given us any. While Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan made it loud and clear that the case was primarily about the assets beyond means and PM was bound to tell the source of funds for London flats.

PM’s counsel argued before the court that since the cross examination hasn’t been done yet, thus the report submitted by the JIT was one-sided. “One basis of such reports no transparent trial is possible,” he argued.