What's new

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
By the way, see the last two tweets. Judges said that defendant has to present all the record how the money was transferred.. That's really good...

Naeem Bukhari didn't even bother to make any reference to famous queen bench division judgement, that's interesting!

Toward disqualification on 62,63, proper forum for this is ECP not SC. CJ today pointed out the same.


This is the reference...


Capture33.PNG
 
.
in this i agree with honorable judges, ECP is forum for such disqualification. Judges also said that in Yousaf Raza Gillani's case, the then PM was first convicted than was disqualified. If money laundering is proved against Shareefs thn NS can be disqualified. Disqualification under article 62, 63 is a matter of ECP

But when ECP is not performing its duty, and even SC remarked...tht instituitions are not doing their job...then what else is the forum, to present their case, if not SC? Also, why should PTI be at disadvantage, if ECP is not performing? Case is taken to the court bcoz instituitions are not performing...so SC wants to say...tht ECP isnt performing...and other instituitions too..but when case is taken to SC, we will still not do, it..bcoz SC is not the forum for 62,63.....?
 
. . .
I Still believe Sheikh Rasheed Case is Simple & Very comprehensive with a Logic, If you can disqualify 12 MPA & MNA only because of Mis Declaration/ hiding their assets & not declaring it with ECP, NS has done the same, Why can't he...
The point remains if Article 62/63 can be applicable in a case with Public Interest involved... Judges think otherwise..

Yes..judges has taken out tht aspect from the case, saying tht 62,63 doesnt apply..and SC is not the forum :(

yaar in short bataoo aaj huwa kya hey... kisnay kiske li hey cuz idhar lenay lonay ka chal raha hey scene... eek din judge eek ke letay hain aglay din doosray ke acha match lagaya huwa hey

Will have to wait for Rauf klasras show tonight to know the exact picture... He said yesterday, he will go to SC today...so he will give an unbiased analysis...
 
.
By the way, see the last two tweets. Judges said that defendant has to present all the record how the money was transferred.. That's really good...




This is the reference...


View attachment 358154

Thanks for the update, channels reported everything but this reference. Only thing available with PTI which shows ownership before 2006, so it's damn important.
 
.
It seems judges are not ready to accept any proofs /arguments against sharif family.. Dunya ka koi bhi saboot le aaye..judges will say..it is not THOS SABOOT...aur jis basis par Ns ki disqualification hosakti hial.usay judges maannay ko tayyar hi nahi
@Farah Sohail What games are they playing with us...Do they think they can fool people with details, jargon and intricacies... while the evidence is clear and the same court took suo moto against a trouser hanging outside the wall of their so called SC..They got to be kidding us but they will not like the consequences...enough of their subjugation






Sorry @war&peace @Farah Sohail But I feel
Now Satan is thinking he will also get Justice in Pakistan @SherDil007
 
Last edited:
. . .
. . .
So picture is quite clearly and Judges maintain their stance very clearly.... Burden of proof is on Nawaz Sharif after the acceptance of the property....
 
.
But when ECP is not performing its duty, and even SC remarked...tht instituitions are not doing their job...then what else is the forum, to present their case, if not SC? Also, why should PTI be at disadvantage, if ECP is not performing? Case is taken to the court bcoz instituitions are not performing...so SC wants to say...tht ECP isnt performing...and other instituitions too..but when case is taken to SC, we will still not do, it..bcoz SC is not the forum for 62,63.....?

All institutions are working hand in glove with NS and his progeny. Remember how shamelessly speaker of national assembly rejected IK and SR references against NS & approved references against IK and JT? For post election disqualification a reference must go through NA speaker office, law requires this mechanism but there's an exception to the rule in the form of Yousuf Raza Gillani case, he was disqualified directly by the court. Lame PM who claims to be ready for his accountability is relying upon the same mechanism in his written reply, he contends whether he lied or not his qualification can't be questioned in supreme court of Pakistan.
 
.
Maryam in focus as SC resumes Panamagate hearing

Focus was on Maryam Nawaz's finances and legal status in the Supreme Court today as hearing of the Panamagate case probing Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his family's assets resumed.

The apex court asked three questions: How did the premier’s children create their companies? Is Maryam Nawaz dependent on someone? And did the prime minister tell the truth in his three speeches on Panamagate?

Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf's (PTI) counsel Naeem Bokhari began his arguments by exploring Maryam Nawaz's financial situation. He observed that the premier's daughter had been gifted Rs50 million and Rs31.7m on two separate occasions by her father.

He also said that Maryam had not paid any utility bills.

The PTI's lead counsel argued in court that Nawaz Sharif's tax returns from 2011 showed that Maryam Nawaz was his dependent.

Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Anwar Zaheer Jamali raised a question about the addition of Rs196m in Maryam Nawaz's wealth which she attributed to a BMW car gifted to her by her father.

"How could a second hand car raise that kind of money?" the CJP asked.

Justice Asif Saeed remarked that the PTI's arguments pointed towards the possibility that Maryam Nawaz was a dependent, but did not shed any light on who she may be dependent on.

Naeem Bokhari concluded his arguments today. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's council Salman Aslam Butt will present his case tomorrow before giving way to Akram Sheikh, the lawyer representing Nawaz Sharif's children.

During today's hearing, Nawaz Sharif’s children submitted a petition in the apex court requesting daily hearings of the case.

"The issue is very critical and institutions are getting affected," stated the petition, which was submitted through senior counsel Akram Sheikh who is representing Maryam Nawaz, Hasan Nawaz and Hussain Nawaz.

CJP Jamali said the court was keeping an open mind on the idea of forming a commission on Panamagate and would make one when it felt a need for it.

Justice Jamali was responding to Jamaat-i-Islami's request of creating an inquiry commission with the mandate to investigate the matter.

On Dec 3, JI chief Sirajul Haq had submitted a fresh application with a request to constitute an inquiry commission. He had also requested that the court make a party in the case all the family members, including children, companies and business entities of those whose names had surfaced in the Panama Papers leaks.

As his lawyer was not present in court, Awami Muslim League leader Sheikh Rasheed, with the permission of the court, argued his own case. He observed that it was strange that the creation of the Sharif family's mills coincided with the completion of a motorway.

The chief justice said the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) and the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) do not operate effectively. He asked "If these institutions do not want to work, why don’t we shut them down?"

Hearing of the case will resume on Dec 13.

http://www.dawn.com/news/1300833/maryam-in-focus-as-sc-resumes-panamagate-hearing
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom