What's new

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
TBH I don't know but judges' observation "PM to face consequences if children fail to furnish money trail" should mean something.

Maybe a NAB trial? The whole strategy of Nawaz Sharif's defense is that he doesn't own the London flats and therefore not answerable. The judges appear annoyed that no documents that prove this have been provided. How has this changed after the JIT?

This is the crux of the matter that the Supreme Court has to establish and that's what they're trying to do:

الزام ہے کہ فلیٹ وزیر اعظم نے خریدے،جسٹس اعجاز افضل
الزام یہ ہے کہ بچے بےنامی دار ہیں،جسٹس اعجاز الاحسن

And perhaps this will lead to disqualification?

بچے فلیٹوں کی خریداری ثابت نہ کرسکے تو پبلک آفس ہولڈرسے پوچھا جائیگا، جسٹس اعجاز افضل

The judges did not really dwell on the the responsibilities of a public office holder in reference to his/her children in the judgement. Nobody raised the point, but the judges have now realized that this is an obvious benami ploy.
 
Last edited:
.
Nisar Kaisa paida howa? Jawani jaan e man haseen dilruba milay jo dil jawan Nisar ho gya. :lol: .

DFVdIoRXkAUiBhz.jpg:large

:rofl:
 
. .
You missed the trick! When you raise an argument that Maryam is figurehead of NS or NS's benamdar then you can't raise the argument that Maryam is dependent of her father because doing so would negate previous argument. She being NS's benamdar is more obvious than being dependent of her father.

Yeah usually judges don't repeat their remarks but they repeatedly reminded the Sharifs that "the onus of proof is on you".

Nawaz Sharif, Maryam Nawaz, Hussain Nawaz and Hassan Nawaz all of them have failed to establish any legitimate money trail.
 
. .
Now that JIT has left the premises of Judicial Academy, who will look at any replies of MLA letters?
 
. .
Now that JIT has left the premises of Judicial Academy, who will look at any replies of MLA letters?

If they're sent by email, then the JIT officers aren't likely to give that up. Physical letters will probably be forwarded to the Supreme Court.
 
.
HAHAHAHHAAH!!!
:rofl:

WAHHHHHHHH

Milay jo dil jawan
Nisar ho gya

:omghaha:

Topi drama ha boss as far as i can see:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/pana...ussion.459474/page-1160#post-9691440:offtopic:


Also:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/pana...-and-discussion.459474/page-1163#post-9692002

Do check these and let us know what you think?


BTW, you using twitter?

Undoubtedly it's a complete topi drama, he'll be normal by tomorrow evening. Tomorrow he'll brag his loyalty towards NS for like an hour or two and by the end of his press conference he'll resume his job on same tankhawa. On a serious note, actually he has some genuine concerns and reservations but seemingly he's out of viable options, NS is too smart to tackle, the only option he has is to say good bye to politics for good. No sir, I don't use twitter anymore, you're all free to share.
 
.
Undoubtedly it's a complete topi drama, he'll be normal by tomorrow evening. Tomorrow he'll brag his loyalty towards NS for like an hour or two and by the end of his press conference he'll resume his job on same tankhawa. On a serious note, actually he has some genuine concerns and reservations but seemingly he's out of viable options, NS is too smart to tackle, the only option he has is to say good bye to politics for good. No sir, I don't use twitter anymore, you're all free to share.
Hmmm, So we are on the same page. Nisar is creating hype to gather attention and when all eyes are at him (since eyes are no longer tolerating Talal or Daniyal or Khawaja) he will use that attnetion to praise Nawaz Sharif and all !

THIS below wont be the case then:
DFVe315XUAAlDUI.jpg


:lol:

Chlo sahi ha!
Lets see what happens.

And yeah i surely will troll the m a bit using that joke "Nisar ho gya" lolz!!
 
.
Ok here is the points on which Nawaz sharif going to be disqualified.

1. Assets and income not matched.
2. Money trail not provided ( Money trail k liye to judges ney takreeban hath jor diye thay bass paon parna baqi reh gaya tha )
3. Benami jaidad. ( London flats ownership not established it means flats purchased by nawaz sharif and another important point at that time nawaz sharif in power )
4. Hill metal 88% profit went to nawaz sharif. ( Jab k woh tou hill metal ka owner bhi nahi hai??? ).
5. Chairman of board of directors of FZE company which PM has accepted.(This is important point because he is remain chairman after becoming prim-minister and he never disclosed it)
6. Aqama of UAE. ( While getting aqama he lied to UAE as well as to Pakistan because ager nawaz sharid salary nahi leyta to UAE se jhot bola aur ager leyta tha to Pakistan sey jhot bola.)
7. SECP chairman done record tampering which is established.
8. Nawaz sharif is unable to prove which he said in front of parliament and people of Pakistan.

And in the last and most important.

9. what ever they said in court or to parliament or public to prove that they right they make fake documents.

Now i don't think so there is any chance nawaz sharif not going to disqualify if it happen tou phir waqaie ya mojza hi hoga aur ager ya howa to bass phir iska matlab hai k hum per ALLAH ka azab aya howa hai aur hum bohat gunah gar qoom hain jiss ko assani sey mafi nahi milni.

@Farah Sohail @Arsalan @expert @Realistic Change @Verve @Baghial @PakSword @war&peace @Emmie @QatariPrince @Shane @PakPak @Strike! @El_Swordsmen @Moonlight @Zibago @The Accountant @The Sandman @Guvera
 
.

Noorani's stories are a bunch of crap with no legal basis.



I am a staunch believer that the Supreme Court must do justice and I fully agree with Justice Gulzar


However, reading through the judgement has given me new insights into the judges' thought process. It appears to me that 4 of the 5 judges really want to rule against Nawaz. Two (Azmat Saeed and Ijaz Ul Ahsan) felt that conclusive evidence was lacking to rule 62/63 BEFORE the JIT. One of the points raised by the judges was that it wasn't proved beyond reasonable doubt as of then, that Maryam was dependent. Therefore, even if she owned the apartments, Nawaz would not have been required to declare those flats. However, both judges have also pointed out that Nawaz Sharif may have been the de facto/benamidaar owner. They wanted to establish that in the JIT. JIT has made some sweeping statements. The judges will have to examine the documents and reports of the JIT to determine whether or not Nawaz Sharif was the real owner.

The judges are not limited to the arguments of the petitioners. They will examine the entire available material, including the FZ companies to see whether or not Nawaz was dishonest in their opinion. Two judges have already judged he was. In my opinion, the bar for dishonesty has been set unbelievably high by the other three judges. We have to hope that the new documents and records convince the judges that Nawaz was in fact dishonest. They will not change their previous legal reasoning. They will examine the new evidence on the basis of that reasoning. In any case, in in my (unimportant) opinion, I don't think the three judges will find any conclusive evidence that will enable them to invoke 62/63. They judges believe Nawaz is guilty of many crimes, but the criminal proceedings will have to be dealt with by a trial court.




They've also said




It's very obvious to us but has the court accepted that?

Meri Jan k totay! You really are an incorrigible one.

You keep saying read the judgement and then quote parts of it that have been extensively addressed in JIT report.

You keep ignoring judges remarks contrary to your own fool hardy ones.

You keep ignoring that Vol 10 when given to Defendants lawyers was returned by them after reading a few pages that they don't want it anymore.

The Judges themselves have commended the JIT for its work despite the adverse circumstances and limited time for such a huge endeavour.

May be I would've grown up enough by the time a verdict is out to make myself understand your defence inspired logic.

This logic seems just a lame as the lame excuses, perjury, forgery, tax evasion and misdeclaration and above all lack of money trail of defence but as of now I am at a total loss to give any weight to your arguments.
 
.
Maybe a NAB trial? The whole strategy of Nawaz Sharif's defense is that he doesn't own the London flats and therefore not answerable. The judges appear annoyed that no documents that prove this have been provided. How has this changed after the JIT?

This is the crux of the matter that the Supreme Court has to establish and that's what they're trying to do:



And perhaps this will lead to disqualification?



The judges did not really dwell on the the responsibilities of a public office holder in reference to his/her children in the judgement. Nobody raised the point, but the judges have now realized that this is an obvious benami ploy.

You're mixing up two aspects of the case. Money laundering and all fall within the category of criminal offenses and SC does not entertain criminal trials neither can declare anything on disputed matter, that said SC will simply refer this stuff to trial court, NAB court to be precise. SC will only decide constitutional aspect of the case which is disqualification under article 62/63; there are a few solid grounds available for disqualification for example misdeclaration of assets.
 
.
Meri Jan k totay! You really are an incorrigible one.

You keep saying read the judgement and then quote parts of it that have been extensively addressed in JIT report.

You keep ignoring judges remarks contrary to your own fool hardy ones.

You keep ignoring that Vol 10 when given to Defendants lawyers was returned by them after reading a few pages that they don't want it anymore.

The Judges themselves have commended the JIT for its work despite the adverse circumstances and limited time for such a huge endeavour.

May be I would've grown up enough by the time a verdict is out to make myself understand your defence inspired logic.

This logic seems just a lame as the lame excuses, perjury, forgery, tax evasion and misdeclaration and above all lack of money trail of defence but as of now I am at a total loss to give any weight to your arguments.

Remarks don't matter as much as the written judgement. How has the dependent issue of Maryam been resolved by the JIT? Justice Ijaz Afzal said: مریم نوازکوبینیفشل مالک تسلیم کربھی لیں توزیر کفالت ہونےکامعاملہ آئیگا، جسٹس اعجاز افضل
مریم نواز کے زیرکفالت ہونے کے واضح شواہد نہیں ملے، جسٹس اعجاز افضل

Commending the JIT does not mean that it has satisfied the legal requirements in the judges' minds. Volume X will have no bearing on the judgement. They are just details of MLA requests and will not be used as evidence.

I'm preparing for the worst but hoping for the best. It's not going to be a uninimous judgement. Justice Afzal Khan is not invoking 62/63. You can read his judgement AND remarks if you have doubts. There is a 50-50 chance for the other two to DQ. IMO.

You're mixing up two aspects of the case. Money laundering and all fall within the category of criminal offenses and SC does not entertain criminal trials neither can declare anything on disputed matter, that said SC will simply refer this stuff to trial court, NAB court to be precise. SC will only decide constitutional aspect of the case which is disqualification under article 62/63; there are a few solid grounds available for disqualification for example misdeclaration of assets.

Can you explain where Nawaz Sharif misdeclared his assets? ECP form?
 
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom