Panama leak Case Proceedings - JIT Report, News, Updates And Discussion

[expert]

This is what Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan said

In any case, the questions how did Gulf Steel Mill come into being; what led to its sale; where did go its sale proceeds; how did they reach Jeddah, Qatar and the U.K.; whether respondents No. 6, 7 and 8 in view of their tender ages Constitution Petition No. 29 of 2016, Constitution Petition No. 30 of 2016 & Constitution Petition No. 03 of 2017 221 had the means in the early nineties to purchase the flats; whether sudden appearance of letters of Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jaber Al-Thani is a myth or a reality; how bearer shares crystallized into the flats; how did Hill Metal Establishment come into existence; where did the money for Flagship Investment Limited and where did its Working Capital Fund come from and where did the huge sums running into millions gifted by respondent No. 7 to respondent No. 1 drop in clamor for answers to be found by the investigation agency and then by the Accountability Court established under the National Accountability Bureau Ordinance.

It looks the the thirteen questions asked to the JIT were for the purpose of sending a reference to the Accountability Court. Despite damning observations of the justices, if no action is taken Nawaz Sharif will only get stronger and we might get into a situation that the Supreme Court becomes a tool for the rulers. I hope the judges realize that the entire nation is looking up to them. The all know Nawaz Sharif is guilty but he's being let off on technical grounds.

 

[Strike!]

Only two aspects.. that is his service in JAFZA where he has received some salary, as I pointed out in one of my earlier posts. Aijaz ul Ahsan may disqualify on this.

Also, receiving 88% of the profit from Hill Metals, meaning he is the the actual owner and Hussain Nawaz is his benamidar.. Court asked several times what is the source of capital to establish Hill Metals.. and defense didn't provide it.. Had the defense proved source of capital as anyone other than NS, judges would have given him benefit of the doubt.

Now judges will have to ascertain the ownership based on the share of profit he has received from this company so far i.e. 88%.

Benami companies ki ownership isi tarah pata lagti hai..

88% profit evidence is based off of source documents..Not sure if judges will treat it as admissible evidence.

 

[Farah Sohail]

Ishaq Dar aik chalak chartered accountant hai..

uss ne aakhri din saaray new tax docs banwa ke dediey.. sources who have some connections with his men in SECP and FBR are telling that he has given all this record on the last day, and not before JIT, because he wanted to gain some more time.. submitting so much documentation on the last day means there is 99% chance his case will be referred to trial court. By that time, if PM is still there (and he has strong feeling that PM is not going home), he will manage the trial court.

**IF** PM is disqualified, he will runaway.

That is the reason why I said yesterday that in ISL there are strong rumors of PM getting away in this case as there are string indications that the case is being referred to trial court as per the finance minister's close friends and acquaintances.

Hamara PM itna beghairat hai, ke ussay verdict main gaalian bhi de di jaein lekin disqualify na kia jaey tou woh mithai baantay..

Harsh verdict uss waqt kaam aayega jab woh disqualify karainge.. kardain tou acha hai, nahi kartay tou khud apnay aamaal ke zimmedar..

How do Dar's friends and acquaintances know tht PM will not be disqualified? Have they read judges' mind? Even last time..verdict was leaked..just a week before the announcement..otherwise judges had maintained complete confidentiality

Amir Mateen whose predictions have been spot on, in this case..believes theres more than 90% chance of PM getting disqualified.. He thinks its almost a done deal

I am sure, atleast Justice Ijazul Ahsan has the courage.. He was looking for an undisputed fact..which he has got from JIT

I just re- read para 84, page 532 of Justice Ijazul Ahsan.. It re assured me, tht he wont shy away from disqualifying PM

 

[PakSword]

88% profit evidence is based off of source documents..Not sure if judges will treat it as admissible evidence.

PMs lawyer didn't contest.. it means that they have accepted. Judges kept repeating it throughout the hearing.

 

[Farah Sohail]

This is what Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan said

It looks the the thirteen questions asked to the JIT were for the purpose of sending a reference to the Accountability Court. Despite damning observations of the justices, if no action is taken Nawaz Sharif will only get stronger and we might get into a situation that the Supreme Court becomes a tool for the rulers. I hope the judges realize that the entire nation is looking up to them. The all know Nawaz Sharif is guilty but he's being let off on technical grounds.

Read para 84, page 532 ..Justice Ijazul Ahsan's verdict

 

[PakSword]

How do Dar's friends and acquaintances know tht PM will not be disqualified? Have they read judges' mind? Even last time..verdict was leaked..just a week before the announcement..otherwise judges had maintained complete confidentiality

Don't know how and why he is too confident.. Hosakta hai Shareef family yeh khabrain khud phela rahi ho ke manage hogaya, ya manage honay ja raha hai, takay PMLN bikharnay se bachi rahay for the time being.. I am just telling you what I heard yesterday. Yeh ghalat bhi hosakta hai..

I am sure, atleast Justice Ijazul Ahsan has the courage.. He was looking for an undisputed fact..which he has got from JIT

I just re- read para 84, page 532 of Justice Ijazul Ahsan.. It re assured me, tht he wont shy away from disqualifying PM

Allah karay aap ki baat theek ho..

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

شریف نہیں چور کہہ دو
بادشاه نہیں مجرم کہہ دو
یہ عدالت میری ہے حکومت میری ہے

درد دل سے ڈرنا کیا , قطری شہزادہ ساتھ میرے
یقین نہیں کرتے اگر آپ مجھ پر, بھیج دونگا نوٹری سٹیمپ لندن سے

میری بادشاہی پر شک ہو, کہہ دو
میری قیادت پر شک ہو, کہہ دو
بھیج دونگا نوٹری سٹیمپ لندن سے


سازش ہے, سازش ہے , کہہ دو
میرا ٹیکس مجھ سے پوچھتے ہیں سازش ہے , کہہ دو
ڈار جب میرے ساتھ ہے تو ڈر کیوں
بھیج دونگا نوٹری سٹیمپ لندن سے

- آزادپاکستان

 

[Realistic Change]

Ishaq Dar aik chalak chartered accountant hai..

uss ne aakhri din saaray new tax docs banwa ke dediey.. sources who have some connections with his men in SECP and FBR are telling that he has given all this record on the last day, and not before JIT, because he wanted to gain some more time.. submitting so much documentation on the last day means there is 99% chance his case will be referred to trial court. By that time, if PM is still there (and he has strong feeling that PM is not going home), he will manage the trial court.

**IF** PM is disqualified, he will runaway.

That is the reason why I said yesterday that in ISL there are strong rumors of PM getting away in this case as there are string indications that the case is being referred to trial court as per the finance minister's close friends and acquaintances.



Hamara PM itna beghairat hai, ke ussay verdict main gaalian bhi de di jaein lekin disqualify na kia jaey tou woh mithai baantay..

Harsh verdict uss waqt kaam aayega jab woh disqualify karainge.. kardain tou acha hai, nahi kartay tou khud apnay aamaal ke zimmedar..

Hmmm.... that's interesting re Dar.

My info is totally and I mean TOTALLY opposite re Dar and even Baji (as @Farah Sohail calls her) eversince Vol 10 has been handed over to $harifz and Dar (of course) the mood is extremely sombre (borderline mourning) reasons you @PakSword know way better than me, as you are closer to the live action.

-------------

As a side note; would you be in DXB in Sep 2017 - if you'll be there, and if possible let's meet up!

 

[Farah Sohail]

Allah karay aap ki baat theek ho..

This is the para, I am talking abt

The learned counsel for the Respondents have laid much stress on the powers of this Court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution and passing orders in terms of Articles 62 & 63 of the Constitution. In this context, the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 as well as Respondent Nos.6, 7 & 8 have emphasized that this Court has traditionally refrained from delving into situations/cases which involve factual controversies requiring recording of evidence. The only exceptions being cases where irrefutable or unrebutted evidence is available or necessary facts are admitted by the parties. It may, however, be noted that new jurisprudence of this Court has evolved in the past few years in matters involving fake degrees and dual citizenship held by the Parliamentarians. The principles regarding exercise of powers under Article 184(3) of the Constitution are undergoing a process of evolution and fresh ground is being broken. The argument made by the learned counsel for the Respondents that evidence cannot be recorded or factual inquires cannot be conducted in exercise of powers under Article 184(3) of the
Constitution may be based on some precedent but we find that this is not a hard and fast, inflexible and rigid principle of law. It has only been followed by way of practice and expediency with exceptions being created and jurisdiction being extended from time to time where the facts and circumstances so required. By way of illustration, the case of Pakistan Muslim League (N) v. Federation of Pakistan [PLD 2007 SC 642] may be cited. In this case, this Court held that that there was no bar on the power of this Court under article 184(3) of the Constitution to record evidence provided voluminous record and complicated questions of fact and law were not involved. This Court is not a slave of the doctrine of stare decisis. We are not shackled by the chains of precedents where the interests of the people of Pakistan so demand. While remaining within the four corners of the law and limits set for us by the Constitution, in order to do complete justice, there is no bar on the power of this Court to record evidence in appropriate cases and pass such orders as may be necessary.

 

[PakSword]

As a side note; would you be in DXB in Sep 2017 - if you'll be there, and if possible let's meet up!

After 9th? anytime Bro.. I am in Abu Dhabi.

 

[Realistic Change]

After 9th? anytime Bro.. I am in Abu Dhabi.

Awesome - I have couple of meetings in Al Bahr Towers in your city, so it would be great to meet.

 

[expert]

I am sure, atleast Justice Ijazul Ahsan has the courage.. He was looking for an undisputed fact..which he has got from JIT

What undisputed fact are you referring to? None of the 13 questions have been answered in a way that proves beyond doubt that Nawaz Sharif was not honest. There are loopholes everywhere.

 

[PakSword]

since Vol 10 has been handed over to $harifz and Dar (of course) the mood is extremely sombre, reasons you @PakSword well better than me, as you are closer to the live action.

Unfortunately, main ne 20th ko baat ki thi, vol 10 has been handed over yesterday (21st)? right? uss ke baad agar gloomy situation hogaee ho tou mujhay maloom nahi.. aap behtar jaantay hongay...

But yes, in Vol 10, if only half of the letters are responded with information, specially related to some Eurpoean countries (as you once rightly mentioned i.e. Luxembourg ), rona dhona tou hona chahiey Shareef khandaan main..

 

[PakSword]

Awesome - I have couple of meetings in Al Bahr Towers in your city, so it would be great to meet.

I will share my contact info.. Just let me know on this forum when you arrive.

 

[Realistic Change]

Wasn't foundation of the whole case based on to prove the rightful ownership and onus being on accused?

Or did onus shift to JIT to prove the accused as guilty?

----

Simplistically put; Nawaz had to prove 'legitimate sources and trail' for the properties that he agrees belong to his family.

Only proof his team provided was Qatari letter without single mention of trail/evidence, and it was "he said, she said, they said, I think, we think..."

Nawaz couldn't provide. what he admitted and boasted about. Onus to prove was on Nawaz.

Court constituted JIT to investigate and find out if what's being claimed by accused has any weight.

JIT submits report.

Court reconvenes and asks primarily the same questions re money trail and proofs.

Basically gets the same answers and no evidence that money trail is legitimate.

So how all this can make Nawaz roam freely to re-do another London or maybe Paris apartments fiasco?

If this happens, in the nutshell, the message will be: even if the investigators and Judiciary are looking for proofs of admittedly owned properties; it's OK and 'legal' to do corruption/live beyond means, and even if being asked by SC, do not give answers and one can live freely and not only that but one can also hold a highest possible public office in the country.