Legal experts say decision in Imran, Tareen cases not unexpected

• Hudaibiya case decision surprise some legal experts

ISLAMABAD: Though the legal experts maintain the decision of Supreme Court of Pakistan about Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran and General Secretary Jahangir Tareen as something that was expected, they seemed surprised over the decision regarding reopening of Hudaibiya Mills case.

Reacting to the two important decisions of the Supreme Court on Friday, Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leader Aitzaz Ahsan said, “We are surprised to see the decision of the superior court in the case. Sharif family got a major relief in the case. I want to tell those who were focusing more on Imran Khan’s case that the important decision of the day is related to Hudaibiya.”

PTI, while celebrating the decision in favour of Imran Khan, should not forget the major decision which went in favor of Sharif family, he said. There were documents and pieces of evidence, including the confessional statement of Ishaq Dar, in the Hudaibiya case, he added.  Had the case been reopened, he said, more difficulties would have been created for the Sharif family. After the decision of Supreme Court, the only other issue creating pressure on Punjab Chief Minister Shehbaz Sharif is the Model Town report.

Commenting on the decision on disqualification case of Imran and Tareen, he said the decision was as per expectations. “It was not an unexpected decision. The disqualification of Tareen had become clearer during the hearings of the case,” he said.

Barrister Ali Zafar said that the decision of the superior court has given a clear message to the lawmakers that declaration of assets is must for holding public office. “The court has made it clear that it is not concerned about where the property exists. The investigation about legal or illegal properties and assets is the responsibility of the national institutions,” he said, adding that the court has set precedent for other lawmakers as well.

Talking about the decision on Hudaibiya Paper Mills, he said, “I think the court should have given more time to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to provide what the court required after the appointment of the new prosecutor by the accountability watchdog,” he added.

Talking to Pakistan Today, Faroogh Naseem, another legal expert, said that there is no comparison between the disqualification cases of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif and Imran Khan. “I’m surprised to see people equating the two different cases. The case against Khan was only about the declaration of assets; on the other hand, there were serious allegations of corruption, money laundering against Nawaz,” he said. The only similarity in the two cases was that both Imran and Nawaz headed a major political party.

Talking to Pakistan Today Supreme Court Bar Association President Syed Muhammad Kalim Ahmed Khursheed said that in Hudaibiya case, the superior court did not condone the delay in the case, which is a discretionary matter. The delay, sometimes, in criminal cases, is condoned by the court when liberty of citizens is in question. “We can only comment on the reasoning of the decision in the case after going through the detailed judgment,” he said.

“The court’s move of leaving the matter of foreign funding in the case against PTI and Imran Khan to Election Commission of Pakistan is good. I think this is a very serious issue as far as the party is concerned,” he said, adding that the overall decision in disqualification case was as per expectations.

The bench found PTI secretary general Jahangir Tareen to be dishonest under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution and Section 99 of Representation of People Act (ROPA) on one count among the multiple charges brought against him.

Article 62(1)(f) — which sets the precondition for the head of government to be Sadiq and Ameen (truthful and honest) — had led to the disqualification of Nawaz Sharif from holding public office in the July 28 judgment on the Panama Papers case.

PML-N leader Hanif Abbasi had sought disqualification of PTI chairman and secretary-general for non-disclosure of their assets and ownership of offshore companies abroad.