What's new

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
.
Sir, regarding the rats supported and chosen by us, I intend to write a thread on Election's history in Pakistan which will explain how the rats were forced upon us due to countries feeding us. Not only custodians of Pakistan surrenderred to foreign pressure but they also grew own politcians and didn't let things flow naturally. Even today, the current system is artifical as it is a result of NRO.

Looking forward to it. Might be an interesting read, though depends how factual.
 
Last edited:
.
رقم بڑھاؤ نواز شریف ہم تمھارے ساتھ ہیں

٣ بک گئے، ٢ کے ساتھ مزاکرات جاری ہیں- میرے خیال میں گورنر کی آفر سے کم پر نہیں مانیں گے

Anyway, those who wanted to know the detail of what happened in the court, below is the best summary I could find...

@Emmie @Farah Sohail @El_Swordsmen @Doordie @IceCold @Verve @epicname @biloo700 @war&peace @friendly_troll96 @The Eagle @Panther 57 @Syed1.

Burden of proof becomes sticking point in Panama case

ISLAMABAD: Members of the Supreme Court bench hearing the Panamagate case on Friday expressed divergent opinions over which side shouldered the burden of proof. While Justice Asif Saeed Khosa — who heads the five-judge bench — wanted the onus to prove innocence to rest on Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s family, two other members of the bench differed.

During the hearing of Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf and Jamaat-i-Islami petitions seeking the disqualification of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Justice Khosa effectively came to the PTI’s rescue when he referred to the 2006 trust deed, declaring Maryam Nawaz Safdar the trustee of her brother Hussain Nawaz, and observed that the onus to prove innocence had shifted to the respondents, i.e. the prime minister’s family.

The observation came when PTI counsel Naeem Bokhari cited a number of communications, such as the June 12, 2012 letter from the British Virgin Islands’ Financial Investigation Agency (FIA) to Mossack Fonseca Money Laundering Reporting Officer J. Nizbeth Maduro, raising queries about Nescoll Limited and Nielson Enterprises Limited — the companies that owned the four London flats.

Justice Khosa says Sharifs should prove their innocence; Justice Azmat and Justice Ejaz want PTI to furnish more evidence
The counsel also referred to Mossack Fonseca’s June 2012 response, acknowledging that Nielson and Nescoll were owned by the same beneficial owner, Maryam, and that family’s business spread over 60 years was the source of her wealth. The counsel also provided acknowledgement of the Samba Financial Group, Jeddah, certifying that Maryam was one of their valued customers since 2002, while highlighting that Maryam did not have the resources to buy the London flats.

She allegedly acted as a tool to launder money for her father, of whom she was a dependant, and received gifts from father and brother, he argued.

Also read: Supreme Court focus remains on Maryam Nawaz's expenditures

So many questions needed to be answered since a strong connection between Maryam Nawaz, Samba Group and Minerva Financial Services Ltd had emerged, Justice Khosa observed, wondering whether the court should utilise the services of forensic investigators to match Maryam Nawaz’s signatures in the trust deed and other documents.

But Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed dissented, observing that the real issues that needed attention were the questions: whether the trust deed was an admitted, valid and effective document; whether the two children were obliged to disclose the deed under UK laws; and under what capacity Maryam was declared the trustee or the owner of these companies.

It is for you (the petitioner) to tell the court what are the principles of benami, the judge said, pointing towards Mr Bokhari, asking whether he wanted the court to lay down a judgement that all gifts such the ones received by Maryam from her father and brother at different points of time were benami.

“Do not burden us to look at the law,” the judge observed, adding that they still were at “square one”.

But Justice Khosa referred to Article 122 of the Qanoon-e-Shahadat 1984, which suggests that the burden of proving a fact rested upon the person who had the knowledge of that fact, adding that it was always difficult to acquire documents regarding offshore investments.

The judge then cited Article 161 of the same law to emphasise that the law vested powers on any judge to pose questions or order the production of any documents to discuss proper proof.

It is for the defendants to produce documents to show how they acquired these offshore companies, as well as the money trail to buy the four London flats, Justice Khosa reiterated.

“Are we recording evidence?”, was the observation from Justice Saeed. “Why not then frame charges?” Justice Khosa observed.

“If we start recording evidence, then you will boycott [these proceedings],” Justice Saeed observed in a lighter vein, pointing towards Naeem Bokhari.

“Is it too much to ask for documents?” was Justice Khosa’s retort.

Justice Azmat also regretted that the defendants had not filed the required documents, adding that in order to refute the evidence filed by the petitioner, they would have to bring documents to support their claims.

Justice Azmat Saeed intervened, saying that the matter would end if the defendants put the relevant documents, explaining how Mariam became the beneficial owner of the London flats, on the court’s record.

At this point, another member of the bench, Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, referred to Article 13 of the Constitution, which provides protection to the accused from bringing any witness or evidence against himself, adding that the Supreme Court was neither a trial court, nor was it seized with a civil case or inquiry at the moment.

“You (the petitioner) have to satisfy us about the authenticity of the documents you have presented before the court,” Justice Khan observed, adding that at this stage, it was too early to consider these documents.

Justice Saeed also reminded the PTI counsel “not go to this territory” since the communications he was referring to were “not sent or received by you” and the documents were “mere photocopies”.

“You [cannot only] rely on the Qanoon-e-Shahadat and throw away the rest of the law and the Constitution,” he said.

“We are trying to find out the truth,” Justice Khosa then intervened, citing the relevant Supreme Court rules. He emphasised that the court enjoyed ample authority to order the production of any evidence necessary.

“Perhaps the stage when the party is required to produce the evidence has not come,” Justice Khan observed, adding that they would have recourse under Article 161 of the Qanoon-e-Shahadat.

“Place all your cards on the table, so that we can look at them,” was Justice Khan’s observation.

Justice Ijazul Ahsan also observed that the petitioner had not provided any document to prove ownership of the flats prior to 2006. But Mr Bokhari kept repeating that it was for the defendants to provide these.

On Friday, PTI also submitted the transcript of an interview of Haroon Pasha – the Sharif’s financial adviser – where he had claimed that all the records and documents about financial transactions had been provided to their lawyer.

Meanwhile, Advocate Shahid Hamid — representing Maryam, Finance Minister Ishaq Dar and Capt Safdar — told Dawn that he may on Monday submit a supplementary reply on behalf of Mariam to rebut the allegations that surfaced during the course of the hearing.

Published in Dawn, January 7th, 2017
 
.
Article from 2011. I think Justice asif saeed khosa is a brave and honest man. nasir khosa his brother was personal secretary of nawaz sharif in 2014.


ISLAMABAD: Latif Khosa is the fourth leading member of the Khosa tribe from Dera Ghazi Khan-Rajanpur, who has got a top position in Punjab at the same time.

Now a total of four Khosas have senior most slots in Punjab. They are cousins but don’t keep any ideal relationship though they may not be bitterly opposed to each other. They are in different camps.

Sardar Zulfikar Khosa is the senior adviser to Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif and his trusted lieutenant. He once remained governor of Punjab during heady days when his area rival Farooq Leghari was president of Pakistan. Zulfikar’s son Dost Mohammad is serving as minister for commerce and investment in the Shahbaz Sharif team. He was the stopgap chief minister of Punjab, a position that he vacated after Shahbaz Sharif’s election as member of the Punjab Assembly.

Nasir Mehmood Khosa is the chief secretary of Punjab, who obviously controls the bureaucracy of the majority province.His brother, Asif Saeed Khosa, is judge of the Supreme Court and was elevated to it from the Lahore High Court a few months back. Their brother, Tariq Masood Khosa, retired as secretary of the Narcotics Division on Monday after attaining the age of superannuation.

The three Khosa brothers — Nasir, Tariq and Justice Asif Saeed — are known for their uprightness and brilliance.Tariq Khosa earned kudos from the Supreme Court more than once. The government refused to reinstate him as director general of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) on the court’s direction after it had removed him for his independent investigation in the Pakistan Steel Mills corruption case.

The government also declined to spare him to lead a probe into the Bank of Punjab loan scandal after the apex court desired so. None of these Khosa brothers have ever been embroiled in any unseemly controversy, having a slight suspicion of corruption, malpractice or irregularity.

However Latif Khosa hardly passed a day without a deafening storm. Wherever he served he locked horns with his opponents very seriously whether it was Federal Law Minister Babar Awan, a section of the lawyers’ community or some members of the superior judiciary.

He was one of the rare PPP members, who was hit at his head by police during the lawyers’ historic movement in Lahore. He heads a powerful group among the lawyers and had held top positions in their forums over the past few decades. When Latif Khosa was appointed governor of Punjab on Tuesday, he was still the president of the PPP’s People’s Lawyers Forum. He has not announced whether or not he would leave this slot. But before he was even sworn in as governor, a petition has been filed in the Lahore High Court challenging his eligibility for the office under the constitution because he was removed as Attorney General on charges of corruption.
 
Last edited:
.
٣ بک گئے، ٢ کے ساتھ مزاکرات جاری ہیں- میرے خیال میں گورنر کی آفر سے کم پر نہیں مانیں گے

Sab Maya ha.... Not that who is being sold but I mean, this Panama thing...... JI and SR advocates are still in line so one can't say that storm is passed with PTI thing which is still not over. Interesting times ahead.
 
.
Express News Report .. Mian Panama Sharif pehle se prepare hote hoe :rofl:
1103959942-1.gif
 
. .
O



This was decided before ik called off islbd lockdown...
Even name of alternare pm has been agreed upon with military

Name of Alternate PM is Ch.Nisar
 
. .
Ch nisar, nthng seems closer to it viewing currnt scenerio, PPP wont let him hold the pm office when recording of asim hussain and brisk action to put ayyan ali on ECL makes it 4 ppp worth confronting and intrestingly 3 out of four demands were frivolous as they focused more on govt to overthrow ch nisar as it would pave the way for them to get away with ease,providing, relations have always been retaliating bw ch nisar and PPP.
 
.
PTI seeks details of fee paid to Sharif family’s lawyers
pti-seeks-details-of-fee-paid-to-sharif-familys-lawyers-376c51ab2fc3190aba80a791dea0a637.JPG


By:
agencies


08-Jan-17

329


ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf leader Andleeb Abbas has written a letter to the Principal Secretary of the Prime Minister in which she asked about the legal expenses that Nawaz Sharif and his family members were bearing with regards to Panamagate case. Furthermore, questions have also been raised in the letter about the use of public resources by government officials and members of the assemblies. Andleeb professed through the letter that the Prime Minister had a history of excessively using public resources for personal interests, and it should be let known as from where did the Prime Minister pay the legal expenses in the Panamagate case. She asked from where the lawyers defending Nawaz Sharif's children were being paid so heavily. Andleeb Abbas demanded that the Supreme Court should take notice of the state's resources being used for the Sharif family.

http://dailytimes.com.pk/pakistan/08-Jan-17/pti-seeks-details-of-fee-paid-to-sharif-familys-lawyers
 
.
@friendly_troll96 @The Eagle @Panther 57 @syed1
PTI seeks details of fee paid to Sharif family’s lawyers
pti-seeks-details-of-fee-paid-to-sharif-familys-lawyers-376c51ab2fc3190aba80a791dea0a637.JPG


By:
agencies


08-Jan-17

329


ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf leader Andleeb Abbas has written a letter to the Principal Secretary of the Prime Minister in which she asked about the legal expenses that Nawaz Sharif and his family members were bearing with regards to Panamagate case. Furthermore, questions have also been raised in the letter about the use of public resources by government officials and members of the assemblies. Andleeb professed through the letter that the Prime Minister had a history of excessively using public resources for personal interests, and it should be let known as from where did the Prime Minister pay the legal expenses in the Panamagate case. She asked from where the lawyers defending Nawaz Sharif's children were being paid so heavily. Andleeb Abbas demanded that the Supreme Court should take notice of the state's resources being used for the Sharif family.

http://dailytimes.com.pk/pakistan/08-Jan-17/pti-seeks-details-of-fee-paid-to-sharif-familys-lawyers


یہ تو ہر طرف سے تابڑ توڑحملے والی بات ہوگئی- اگر نواز شریف پانامہ سے بچ نکلنے میں کامیاب ہوجاتا ہے، تو اسکا مطلب اس کے ساتھ سپریم کورٹ کے ساتھ ساتھ غیبی امداد بھی ہے- یا پھر الله ہمارے گناہوں کی سزا نواز شریف کی صورت میں دے رہا ہے- جب تک قوم اجتماعی توبہ نہیں کریگی، مسئلہ حل نہیں ہوگا-

ویسے عمران خان نے اپنے کرکٹ کیریئر میں بھی اتنی باؤنسرز نہیں ماری ہونگی جتنی اس ایک کیس میں ماردی ہیں- یہ کیس اگر عمران خان ہارتا ہے تو اس کا پولیٹیکل کیریئر اختتام پذیر ہوجاۓگا
 
.
PTI seeks details of fee paid to Sharif family’s lawyers
pti-seeks-details-of-fee-paid-to-sharif-familys-lawyers-376c51ab2fc3190aba80a791dea0a637.JPG


By:
agencies


08-Jan-17

329


ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf leader Andleeb Abbas has written a letter to the Principal Secretary of the Prime Minister in which she asked about the legal expenses that Nawaz Sharif and his family members were bearing with regards to Panamagate case. Furthermore, questions have also been raised in the letter about the use of public resources by government officials and members of the assemblies. Andleeb professed through the letter that the Prime Minister had a history of excessively using public resources for personal interests, and it should be let known as from where did the Prime Minister pay the legal expenses in the Panamagate case. She asked from where the lawyers defending Nawaz Sharif's children were being paid so heavily. Andleeb Abbas demanded that the Supreme Court should take notice of the state's resources being used for the Sharif family.

http://dailytimes.com.pk/pakistan/08-Jan-17/pti-seeks-details-of-fee-paid-to-sharif-familys-lawyers
Thank you. Surely you always keep us posted :-)
 
.
ران خان ہارتا ہے تو اس کا پولیٹیکل کیریئر اختتام پذیر ہوجاۓگا


Which brings me to my original question: was there any need to risk every thing on such a flimsy case???
 
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom