- Hanif Abbasi’s lawyer says PTI leader should be disqualified for acquiring income through insider trading
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) observed on Tuesday that insider trading does not have to be declared in the election nomination papers, as the apex court bench debated the grounds for disqualification of lawmakers while deliberating what constitutes as “dishonesty”.
The remarks were made by Justice Umar Ata Bandial during the hearing of the disqualification case against Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan and Secretary General Jahangir Tareen over the alleged non-disclosure of assets, existence of offshore companies, as well as receiving foreign funding for the party.
During a previous hearing of the case, Tareen’s lawyer had presented details of his client’s ‘insider trading’. He had told the court that Tareen did not inflict a loss upon anyone through his actions. The lawyer had further said that Tareen had resigned as the chief executive officer and was discharging his responsibilities as a member of the board of governors of the company whose shares were brought.
During Tuesday’s hearing, petitioner Hanif Abbasi’s lawyer Azid Nafees argued that Tareen should be disqualified as he had engaged in insider trading and acquired income through such activity. Nafees added that Tareen had confessed his involvement in insider trading and also paid a penalty for it to the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan on January 12, 2008.
“This is enough to declare [Tareen] dishonest,” the lawyer said.
The counsel further argued that the PTI leader had violated Sections 15A (prohibition of insider trading) and 15B (inside information) of the Securities and Exchange Ordinance, 1969.
The prosecution told the bench that Tareen was the director of a company when he violated the laws.
“Does the violation of the law amount to dishonesty?” the chief justice asked. “Can the violation of every law be grounds for disqualification?”
“How can the violation of every law be fitted into the definition of dishonesty?”
“After all these questions, should we disqualify someone for violating the laws regarding business dealings?” he added, noting that Tareen had paid off the penalty for insider trading. “We accept that laws were violated, that mistakes were made, but where did dishonesty come [in to this argument] from?”
“Has fraud or a crime of any sort been committed?” Justice Bandial enquired. The lawyer replied that insider trading was a crime according to the law.
“You will have to prove Tareen was dishonest regarding insider trading,” the judge added.
The petitioner’s lawyer further maintained that the PTI leader had also provided incorrect information in his nomination papers in 2013. “For that, he can be disqualified. Under Article 62, he can be disqualified for life,” the lawyer insisted.
CJP Nisar recalled that Tareen had not declared income earned from contracted land in the nomination papers ostensibly as there was no column in the forms to do so — an argument made by Tareen’s lawyer in an earlier hearing of the case.
He said that Tareen had declared the agricultural tax he had paid in the nomination papers.
Meanwhile, hearing Abbasi’s counsel for Imran’s case, Akram Sheikh’s arguments, the chief justice remarked that judges are also working under the ambit of the law.
He remarked further that election tribunals are the appropriate forum for resolving issues with someone’s election.
The hearing was adjourned until Wednesday.
The last hearing of the case, with regards to Tareen, was held on Oct 25 when the CJP observed that Tareen was yet to submit a trust deed to the court regarding his UK property.
Over the last weekend, Tareen submitted the ‘trust deed’ to the Supreme Court regarding a 12-acre property he owns in the United Kingdom.
According to the documents, Tareen is a ‘settlor’ for the trust which owns 12 acres in the UK through its company, Shiny View Limited.
The trust was created in 2011 for a period of 150 years, the documents state further.
Tareen and his wife have also been listed as the trust’s ‘discretionary lifetime beneficiaries’.
They also state that Tareen can direct the trustees to transfer the income from the trust fund to any of the discretionary beneficiaries, including him.
The documents also elaborate that in case Tareen dies, his wife, children and grandchildren will be named as discretionary beneficiaries.