- Zia says SC deputy registrar phoned JIT when probe team asked bench for guidance
- JIT head admits letters written by Qatari royal himself
ISLAMABAD: Wajid Zia said on Thursday that the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) – formed to probe the Sharif family’s assets during the Panama Papers case in the Supreme Court (SC) – could not collectively agree on whether to send a questionnaire to Qatari Royal Prince Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani, adding that the probe team decided on its own regarding the Qatari letters.
The JIT head and Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) additional director appeared before the accountability court proceedings against the former premier Nawaz Sharif and his family in graft references on Thursday.
While his cross-examination by defence counsel Khawaja Haris in Avenfield properties’ references, the ‘star’ witness of National Accountability Bureau (NAB) revealed that the Panama implementation bench conveyed its message through SC Deputy Registrar Mazhar Abbas when they requested guidance after failing to develop consensus over the Qatari letter issue.
Zia said that he had written to the three-member implementation bench of the top court before responding to the Qatari letter in which Prince Al Thani offered the probe team to visit him in Doha since it was not possible for him to travel to Pakistan.
The Qatari prince had also sought a questionnaire of details if the JIT chose to come to Doha while the probe team requested him to provide additional documents supporting the money trail. Zia told Haris that the Qatari prince had thrice reconfirmed the content of the letters submitted by the Sharif family in his name before the court.
Zia admitted that there was no doubt that the letters were written by the Qatari prince when asked if there was any doubt about who wrote them.
by followers and party workers on arrival of NAB Court in Islamabad on Thursday, March 29,
2018. (Imran Jaffri/PPI Images).
Recollecting a phone call from the SC deputy registrar, he informed that court that the implementation bench asked the JIT to decide the matter by itself since it was pertaining to the probe. Zia said that the bench did not respond to any of the three letters sent by the JIT. It was their “first and last” correspondence with the implementation bench, he added.
He further stated that the JIT had decided earlier on its own neither travel to Doha nor send the questionnaire, elaborating that the JIT had not clarified its stance to the Qatari prince and also had not informed the bench about its decision regarding the letters, and that he had never sent a questionnaire to any witness in his entire career.
Haris asked Zia whether this information was mentioned in the JIT report in which the latter responded in negative.
Discussing his career spanning almost 30 years as an investigation officer, Zia said, “I have conducted numerous local and international investigations. I remained investigator with International War Crimes Tribunal for five years in Yugoslavia.”
“I was part of the FIA team in the Benazir Bhutto murder case and the high treason case against Pervez Musharraf.”
When asked whether he had earlier conducted an investigation in any NAB case, Zia replied in a negative.
The Sharifs’ counsel ended his cross-examination after which the court adjourned the hearing till Friday.
During the last hearing on Wednesday, Wajid had stated that there was no document to show that Nawaz Sharif was the owner or had remained the owner of the Avenfield apartments at any point in time.
The statement was made as Nawaz’s counsel Khawaja Harris began cross-examination of the National Accountability Bureau’s star witness in the Avenfield reference against the Sharif family.
On the matter of the leaked photograph of Hussain Nawaz during interrogation, Zia said, “It’s true that Hussain Nawaz’s picture during his appearance before the JIT [at the judicial complex] was leaked and went viral on social media, adding, “the name [of person who leaked the photo] was shared with the attorney general of Pakistan and left it to him to decide whether he wants to share the name of the person responsible for the picture leak or not.”
During the court proceedings, Harris asked Zia if there was any document proving that the Avenfield properties belonged to Nawaz to which Zia answered in the negative.
