ISLAMABAD: Sharif family can face up to 14 years imprisonment, heavy fine and freezing of property, if the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) files a reference and the accountability court accepts that a violation of Section 9 of the NAB Ordinance 1999 has been done as suggested in the report of the Panamagate Joint Investigation Team (JIT).
The Joint Investigation Team (JIT), formed by the Supreme Court to investigate the off-shore wealth of the Sharif family, has found disparities in the family’s known sources of income and their actual wealth which the report says that the Sharif family was unable to substantiate. The JIT’s report on the probe suggests that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, his sons Hassan Nawaz and Hussain Nawaz, as well as daughter Maryam Nawaz have been found in violation of Section 9 of the NAB Ordinance 1999. It also recommended filing of reference against Nawaz Sharif and his sons with the NAB.
“Significant gap/disparity amongst the known and declared sources of income and the wealth accumulated by the Respondent No. 1, 6, 7 and 8 have been observed,” the JIT observed in its concluding remarks in the report.
Respondent 1 refers to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif; Respondent 6 refers to Maryam Nawaz; while Respondents 7 and 8 are used to refer to Hussain and Hassan Nawaz respectively.
The section 9 of NAB Ordinance 1999 states that “A holder of public office, or any other person, is said to commit or to have committed the offence of corruption and corrupt practices […] if he or any of his dependents or benamidars owns and possesses or has acquired right or title to any assets or holds irrevocable power of attorney in respect of any assets or pecuniary resources disproportionate to his known sources of income, which he cannot reasonably account for or maintains a standard of assets beyond that which is commensurate with his sources of income…”
The NAB Ordinance also states that “a holder of public office or any other person who commits the offence of corruption and corrupt practices shall be punishable with [rigorous] imprisonment for a term which may extend to 14 years [and with fine] as per section 10 of the NAB Ordinance”.
The NAB Ordinance further discloses that “where [an accused] found guilty of an offence is sentenced to pay a fine, the amount of the fine shall in no case be less than the gain derived by the accused or any relative or associate [by the commission of the offence]”.
Similarly, the Chairman NAB or the Court trying [an accused] for any offence as specified under this Ordinance, may, at any time, if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the accused has committed such an offence, order the freezing of his property, or part thereof, whether in his possession or in the possession of any relative, associate or person on his behalf.
It is worth mentioning that the JIT has also invoked Section 14(c) of the NAB ordinance, which states that: “In any trial of an offence punishable under clause (v) of sub-section (a) of Section 9 of this Ordinance, the fact that the accused person on his behalf, is in possession for which the accused person cannot satisfactorily account, of assets and pecuniary resources disproportionate to his known sources of income, or that such person has, at or about the time of the commission of the offence with which he is charged, obtained an accretion to his pecuniary resources or property for which he cannot satisfactorily account, the Court shall presume, unless the contrary is proved, that the accused person is guilty of the offence of corruption and corrupt practices and his conviction therefore shall not be invalid by reason only that it is based solely on such presumption.”
Pfffff—What a mess – !!!!!!!! OMG
Comments are closed.