Qatari prince was ready to testify, JIT wasn’t interested, Nawaz claims

• Deposed PM accuses JIT chief Wajid Zia of misleading UAE govt, says Zia’s statements based on his own opinion
• Accuses Radley of having ‘ulterior motive’ because he prepared report of a document’s photocopy even though it was illegible 

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader Nawaz Sharif on Tuesday criticised the Supreme Court-mandated Joint Investigation Team (JIT) for not making any “serious efforts” to record the statement of Qatar’s Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al-Thani despite the prince’s willingness to testify.

Nawaz, the deposed premier, resumed recording his statement in response to the 29-page questionnaire handed over by the accountability court regarding the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Avenfield reference.

Defending the Qatari prince in his statement, the deposed premier said that the record clearly showed that “Qatari prince never avoided joining the JIT’s proceeding”. The prince wanted to meet the JIT “at his palace rather than the Pakistan embassy”, he added.

He said that the statement by JIT head Wajid Zia doesn’t contain even a “slightest bit of truth” who tried to hide this “glaring oversight with blatant lying”.  “The whole statement of Zia was based on opinion and the conclusions drawn by him and the JIT are inadmissible in the court of law, the ousted premier said.

“The prince even wrote a letter to the top court confirming the authenticity of the letters involved,” he said.

Nawaz also said that he was not involved in the preparation of the worksheet that was submitted to the SC.

He further accused Zia of misleading the UAE government rather than seeking “information regarding the transportation of machinery from Dubai to Saudi Arabia”.

Testifying regarding the money trail of the London flats, Nawaz said he was ignorant of “events and transactions” relating to Dubai Steel Mills and added he, however, had seen the copies of these agreements.

The three-time premier also distanced himself from the acquisition of the London apartments, saying there was no record that linked him with these apartments.

“I am neither a beneficiary nor the real owner of offshore companies Nescoll and Nielsen,” he went on to add.

He also accused forensic expert Robert Radley of having an “ulterior motive”.

Despite the fact that the photocopy of a document could not be forensically examined, Radley proceeded to prepare the report, Nawaz said while referring to the two photocopies of trust deeds sent to the expert by UK solicitor Akhtar Riaz Raja that pertained to Nescoll and Nielson companies.

During the probe by the JIT, Radley had pointed out the inauthenticity of the trust deeds, saying the Calibri font used in the documents wasn’t even commercially available at the time of their materialisation. To corroborate further, Nawaz said Jeremy Freeman, another UK solicitor, in January 2017 had admitted and confirmed the genuineness of the trust deed but the JIT or its solicitor, Raja, didn’t bother to obtain the copies from Freeman.

Commenting on the Capital FZE document, where he worked as a chairman, Nawaz said the documents was “irrelevant”.

Nawaz, while responding to questions pertaining to his absconding sons—Hasan and Hussain— said his sons are independents and are answerable to their own acts.

The court has adjourned the hearing till Wednesday. Nawaz has so far responded to 123 out of 128 questions on the list.

PREVIOUS HEARING:

On a hearing on Monday, Nawaz Sharif had expressed his reservations over the formation of the JIT and the selection of its six members. He had hired his own close relative to “produce fabricated evidence” against the Sharif family.

He had also said that Bilal Rasool, another member of the JIT, is a close relative of former Lahore mayor Mian Azhar, while State Bank of Pakistan’s Amer Aziz was also a part of the investigation of the Hudaibiya Paper mills reference — which was quashed by the Lahore High Court (LHC).

Regarding the appointments of Brigadier Nouman Saeed of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Brigadier Kamran Khursheed of the Military Intelligence to the JIT, Nawaz had said, “Their appointments were inappropriate with the obvious fallout on the JIT proceedings, given the civil-military tension that has plagued the country throughout its 70-year history.”

“Brig Nouman Saeed was a ‘source employee’ under a contract which is not recognised as legal, and officially neither his association with ISI nor his pay is reflected in any official record,” Nawaz had said, adding that Brig Saeed was also one of the members of the inquiry committee which has inquired into the issue relating to Dawn leaks which had further heightened the civil-military tensions.”

Nawaz and his family members are facing three references — Avenfield properties, Al-Azizia and Flagship Investment Co — filed by the NAB on the orders of the Supreme Court in its July 28, 2017, Panama Papers judgement.

The PML-N supremo, his daughter Maryam, and son-in-law Captain (r) Muhammad Safdar, have been asked to record final statements in their defence in the references under Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and to produce, on record, anything contradicting the statements of the 19 prosecution witnesses in the case.

Accountability Judge Muhammad Bashir had prepared a questionnaire of 128 questions and handed it over to the counsel representing the Sharif family on May 16.