–CJP Nisar says verdict unlikely to come soon as court has to decide honesty of PTI chief
–Court says trust deed shows Tareen of being beneficial owner of Shiny View Ltd
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday reserved its judgement in a petition seeking the disqualification of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan and Secretary General Jahangir Tareen after counsels from both sides concluded their arguments.
A three-member bench of the apex court ─ headed by Chief Justice Saqib Nisar and comprising Justice Faisal Arab and Justice Umar Ata Bandial ─ has been hearing the petition filed by Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader Hanif Abbasi, who is seeking the leaders’ disqualification as members of the National Assembly over allegations of concealing their sources of income.
During Tuesday’s hearing, the counsel representing Khan told the court that the defence had submitted all documents they could obtain before the court
Advocate Naeem Bokhari maintained that 100,000 pounds were available in the account of Niazi Services Limited (NSL) ─ an offshore company owned by the PTI chairman. In July 2007, 20,000 pounds were transferred to Imran’s personal account, while another sum of 22,000 euros was transferred into the account in March 2008,and was cashed four years later in 2012.
During previous hearings of the case, the court had raised a question about 100,000 pounds retained in the NSL account. The lawyer had told the court that the sum was retained to cover legal fees. However, later the defence had backtracked and claimed that the amount had only initially been retained but parts of it were later remitted to Khan by the company.
On Tuesday, the lawyer maintained the second position and recounted it before the court.
During the hearing, Justice Bandial said that Imran had not declared his euro account in his nomination papers and asked when the account had been opened and with what sum of money.
The lawyer told the court that the account had been opened while the court heard arguments pertaining to the PTI chief’s London flat. He added that his client had subsequently brought the money from the euro account to Pakistan.
CJP Justice Saqib Nisar in his remarks said the court had to decide if Imran was an honest man, adding that the judgement should not be expected anytime soon.
The CJP asked if hiding assets in the nomination papers was a mistake or deliberate lying. To this, Advocate Bukhari said “Imran failing to declare his income” could be a mistake.
“How will the mistakes committed in past impact the future?” the CJP questioned.
As Bukhari completed his arguments, Akram Sheikh, the lawyer representing Abbasi, said that while the defence had presented documents pertaining to Jemima Khan’s Bani Gala property, documents regarding assets owned outside of Pakistan by the PTI chief’s former wife had not been presented in court.
“Naeem Bokhari says that hiding assets can be a mistake,” Sheikh said.
He claimed that during the hearing of the case, the PTI chief had changed his stance 18 times.
“The shifting of his position shows that he is not Sadiq and Ameen,” the lawyer added.
The court reserved its verdict after the lawyers wrapped up their arguments.
TAREEN’S CASE:
Hearing Tareen’s case, who was represented by his counsel Sikandar Mohmand, the court observed that it seems Tareen is the beneficial owner of the offshore company, Shiny View Ltd.
Justice Umar Ata Bandiyal noted that it is clear in the trust deed submitted by Tareen that there are two lifetime beneficiaries of the trust.
Abbasi’s counsel argued that the presence of the offshore company is not declared in tax returns and nomination papers of Tareen.
During the previous hearing on Nov 9, the chief justice observed that Tareen has already served his punishment according to the law.
Attorney General Ashtar Ausaf Ali presented his arguments before the bench, saying Tareen’s counsel challenged two sections of the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) act.
He added that the fine imposed on Tareen by SECP in 2008 for insider trading has been submitted in the national kitty and there is no point objecting to the law after 10 years.
Tareen also provided the court the trust deed regarding a 12-acre property he owns in the United Kingdom.
