Where is the evidence of Nawaz Sharif's narrative?

[Mansoon]

Since the proceedings of Panama Leaks began in SC, scores of PMLN supporters and members of media cell have come forward demanding evidence from PTI of Nawaz Sharif corruption. It's a reasonable demand as PTI has been the most vocal of all parties, going as far as threatening the lockdown of capital Islamabad if deadlock wasn't resolved.
Now honorable Supreme Court have taken the matter in their own hands, requesting all parties involved to provide evidence on Nawaz Sharifs purchase of flats mentioned in Panama Leaks. So far both parties have presented pages upon pages of "evidence" which the judges have ridiculed since day 1. They call newspaper headlines from those years flats were purchased as pakora wrappings. Investigative book that details purchase of these flats is labeled inadmissible. Tons of video documentary evidence with contradictory narratives is deemed political statements.
Only thing left now is the actual purchase documents of these flats which cannot be provided by anyone else but Nawaz Sharif. It's the only way he can come clean and conclude this never ending corruption controversy for ever. Purchase documents will include land registery records that would authenticate the date and ownership of these flats.
So you see its really as simple as that. No need to submit thousands of pages to prove Nawaz Sharif is corrupt. Just ask him to provide purchase documents. If he refuses then something is obviously fishy about the whole thing and he must be dismissed for not coming clean on the issue. If he provides those documents and they indeed collaborate with his narrative which he gave on the floor of Parliament, then PTI and others must be punished for failing to provide evidence of his corruption. That would be the most logical and just solution for all parties involved.
@SBD-3 @Danish saleem @Ranasikander @Emmie @WAJsal @Kaptaan @Leader @mingle @Moonlight @PakSword

 

[airmarshal]

No opposition party has investigative agency under its control What Supreme Court is saying is itself a cruel joke. How can PTI or Shiekh Rasheed bring incontrovertible evidence before the court? They can only present investigative journalist reports, evidence from Panama Leaks or evidence of some written documents. The court has to appoint some investigative agency to verify the proof.

All the agencies are under govt. The govt is under a thief! So there you go.

If after all evidence and Nawaz self contradictory statements dont indict Sharif and his family of corruption, then without doubting my patriotism, please set the country on fire and destroy it forever.

 

[SBD-3]

No opposition party has investigative agency under its control What Supreme Court is saying is itself a cruel joke. How can PTI or Shiekh Rasheed bring incontrovertible evidence before the court? They can only present investigative journalist reports, evidence from Panama Leaks or evidence of some written documents. The court has to appoint some investigative agency to verify the proof.

All the agencies are under govt. The govt is under a thief! So there you go.

If after all evidence and Nawaz self contradictory statements dont indict Sharif and his family of corruption, then without doubting my patriotism, please set the country on fire and destroy it forever.

How could an investigative Journalist make any such report without having any/some documents to back up? You're comparing investigative journalism with anchorship.

 

[abc123xyx]

where is he now a days ??

 

[Mansoon]

The court has to appoint some investigative agency to verify the proof.
All the agencies are under govt. The govt is under a thief! So there you go.

Exactly. If all plaintiffs agree to forming a judicial commission, with all its independent authority to collect any evidence from any person, then of course it should work as well. Only problem here is that these plaintiffs are not on the same page.

How could an investigative Journalist make any such report without having any/some documents to back up? You're comparing investigative journalism with anchorship.

Correct. Courts do not accept paper clippings or any published material as evidence regarding the purchase of flats. Only thing that matters in court is purchase documents which neither party is providing despite Court's hinting for it.

where is he now a days ??

who?

 

[SBD-3]

Naeem ul Haq claims to have gotten some evidence.

 

[Mansoon]

Naeem ul Haq claims to have gotten some evidence.

Finally some common sense has gotten itself in PTI's leadership. Hamid Khan was the culprit, he had to go.

 

[HAIDER]

Finally some common sense has gotten itself in PTI's leadership. Hamid Khan was the culprit, he had to go.

Is not common sense, its a shame that how few of us defend the corruption of our favorite leaders as religious duty......Give thumps up to Imran Khan for his fighting spirit. .....whatever he is ...he don t quit ...Even English daily Dawn newspaper every day publishing anti IK articles.....

 

[PakSword]

@Mansoon

Don't believe on Maryam's media cell people. They spread the false rumors that SC only asked PTI to provide the evidences. Don't believe Babar Sattar as he has conflict of interests and is not an independent analyst. He is the only one who is saying that burden of proof is on PTI. Why is he doing this? Because he is acting as a counsel in a very similar case regarding Mian Mansha. So naturally, he will support his own stance.

There is one more individual who thinks that PTI has not provided enough proofs. He is one member in the five member bench, which is hearing this case. He is the same judge who said words like "Pakora", "Alif Laila ki Kahani", "Ummedain tou Aurtain Karti hain". I mean he is a shameless creature who uttered these derogatory words against women. Only PMLN people who share the same level of shamelessness can accept these remarks.

Please read the remarks of other 4 judges on this issue. Media, specially Maryam media cell doesn't want you to know what they said to PMLN lawyers in court.

The people who think that burden of proof to satisfy the court is on PMLN, once the party has accepted the ownership of flats and companies, include following:

1 - Aitzaz Ahsan
2 - Justice (R) Wajeeuddin
3 - Justice (R) Iftikhar Chaudhry
4 - Latif Khosa
5 - Farogh Naseem
6 - Fawad Chaudhry
7 - Irfan Qadir - Ex attorney general of Pakistan

All of them are saying that it is not a trial. It's an inquiry and investigating the truth is the responsibility of all parties. However, when one party accepts the ownership of assets, proving that the properties were purchased with legal money is the responsibility of accused.

NAB, and Anti Money Laundering Ordinances also require the accused to prove innocence during inquiry.

Consider this scenario, if a person steals a TV and puts it in his house. Police asks the individual whose TV has been stolen to name someone in the FIR. That person somehow has the idea that who could have stolen the TV because he has seen the same brand with same year of manufacture and same marks of identification in the thief's house. What will police do? It will add the accused name in FIR and start inquiry.

The police will ask the accused to present himself in the police station. The accused will either reject the accusation and say that there is no TV in his house of this brand, or he will accept that the TV is in his house with same identification and brand.

Suppose the accused accepts it in front of police, police will ask him to prove that he is the rightful owner of the TV. Police will ask both to provide purchase documents but the accuser says that the documents were there in the TV cabinet, and the thief has taken away those documents as well. The accused brings a friend's written statement, which states that the friend gifted the TV to the accused. However, in the process, the accuser shows him the pictures of the same TV in his house on different occasions. This is to help the police in inquiry.

What will police do? Accept the friends written statement, or do the further investigation? Or will ask the accuser to bring more proof of his ownership, in addition to the pictures he has already provided?

Since the accuser doesn't have the authority to enter accused house, police will use its authority to investigate by going into the house of the accused, match the pictures, ask the friend to visit police station and give documents of purchase, etc etc etc. Suppose the friend is not able to provide the documents, police will get the search warrants to search accused house. If the pictures are matched exactly and purchase documents are also found in the name of accuser, and the police is satisfied that the accused is most likely the same thief who has stolen TV, it will get the arrest warrants.

Police will take the accused and the accuser to the court and present the evidences that it has collected so far. The trial will then begin. It will be on the police and accuser to prove that the evidences collected are enough to prove the thief guilty of stealing.

You can change the roles in the above example, accuser with the Pakistani nation (represented by PTI), police with NAB/ FIA, and accused with the Sharif family.

Now court is saying that police (NAB/ FIA) are not doing their tasks. So court is forced to do inquiry. Going by the above example, it is court's responsibility to find out the truth as well, not just PTI, and it is the sole responsibility of accused (PMLn) to prove their innocence in the initial inquiry.

The above example has been given by my friends in legal department in my company, who are qualified to practice in UK and US. I was sitting with them in the morning and I narrated what's happening in Pakistan and they told me how a trial and inquiry are different and why the burden of proof is on accused, not the accuser.

I liked the example so much that I wanted to mention it here for other members understanding. Maybe the example doesn't fit completely with what is happening in Pakistan, but after hearing Aitzaz, Wajeeuddin, Iftikhar Chaudhry and others, I believe it's the closest example of the Panama inquiry.

And yes, they said that the inquiry's result may come earlier, but the trial has to take place as well whose results may take time if the inquiry is performed by institutions other than court. Court can also form an inquiry commission to investigate. Since the court is doing the inquiry right now (and court hasn't decided on the inquiry commission), the trial will be very quick. This inquiry may be converted into trial by the bench and general public may not know about it. NOW IF THE BENCH MEMBERS HAVE ALREADY DECIDED THAT THE TRIAL IS REQUIRED IN FUTURE, THEY MAY BE ASKING PTI TO PROVIDE SOME SOLID PROOFS SO THAT THEIR TIME IS SAVED DURING THE TRIAL.

@Farah Sohail @Verve @django @Moonlight @El_Swordsmen @Emmie @The Sandman

 

[El_Swordsmen]

@Mansoon

Don't believe on Maryam's media cell people. They spread the false rumors that SC only asked PTI to provide the evidences. Don't believe Babar Sattar as he has conflict of interests and is not an independent analyst. He is the only one who is saying that burden of proof is on PTI. Why is he doing this? Because he is acting as a counsel in a very similar case regarding Mian Mansha. So naturally, he will support his own stance.

There is one more individual who thinks that PTI has not provided enough proofs. He is one member in the five member bench, which is hearing this case. He is the same judge who said words like "Pakora", "Alif Laila ki Kahani", "Ummedain tou Aurtain Karti hain". I mean he is a shameless creature who uttered these derogatory words against women. Only PMLN people who share the same level of shamelessness can accept these remarks.

Please read the remarks of other 4 judges on this issue. Media, specially Maryam media cell doesn't want you to know what they said to PMLN lawyers in court.

The people who think that burden of proof to satisfy the court is on PMLN, once the party has accepted the ownership of flats and companies, include following:

1 - Aitzaz Ahsan
2 - Justice (R) Wajeeuddin
3 - Justice (R) Iftikhar Chaudhry
4 - Latif Khosa
5 - Farogh Naseem
6 - Fawad Chaudhry
7 - Irfan Qadir - Ex attorney general of Pakistan

All of them are saying that it is not a trial. It's an inquiry and investigating the truth is the responsibility of all parties. However, when one party accepts the ownership of assets, proving that the properties were purchased with legal money is the responsibility of accused.

NAB, and Anti Money Laundering Ordinances also require the accused to prove innocence during inquiry.

Consider this scenario, if a person steals a TV and puts it in his house. Police asks the individual whose TV has been stolen to name someone in the FIR. That person somehow has the idea that who could have stolen the TV because he has seen the same brand with same year of manufacture and same marks of identification in the thief's house. What will police do? It will add the accused name in FIR and start inquiry.

The police will ask the accused to present himself in the police station. The accused will either reject the accusation and say that there is no TV in his house of this brand, or he will accept that the TV is in his house with same identification and brand.

Suppose the accused accepts it in front of police, police will ask him to prove that he is the rightful owner of the TV. Police will ask both to provide purchase documents but the accuser says that the documents were there in the TV cabinet, and the thief has taken away those documents as well. The accused brings a friend's written statement, which states that the friend gifted the TV to the accused. However, in the process, the accuser shows him the pictures of the same TV in his house on different occasions. This is to help the police in inquiry.

What will police do? Accept the friends written statement, or do the further investigation? Or will ask the accuser to bring more proof of his ownership, in addition to the pictures he has already provided?

Since the accuser doesn't have the authority to enter accused house, police will use its authority to investigate by going into the house of the accused, match the pictures, ask the friend to visit police station and give documents of purchase, etc etc etc. Suppose the friend is not able to provide the documents, police will get the search warrants to search accused house. If the pictures are matched exactly and purchase documents are also found in the name of accuser, and the police is satisfied that the accused is most likely the same thief who has stolen TV, it will get the arrest warrants.

Police will take the accused and the accuser to the court and present the evidences that it has collected so far. The trial will then begin. It will be on the police and accuser to prove that the evidences collected are enough to prove the thief guilty of stealing.

You can change the roles in the above example, accuser with the Pakistani nation (represented by PTI), police with NAB/ FIA, and accused with the Sharif family.

Now court is saying that police (NAB/ FIA) are not doing their tasks. So court is forced to do inquiry. Going by the above example, it is court's responsibility to find out the truth as well, not just PTI, and it is the sole responsibility of accused (PMLn) to prove their innocence in the initial inquiry.

The above example has been given by my friends in legal department in my company, who are qualified to practice in UK and US. I was sitting with them in the morning and I narrated what's happening in Pakistan and they told me how a trial and inquiry are different and why the burden of proof is on accused, not the accuser.

I liked the example so much that I wanted to mention it here for other members understanding. Maybe the example doesn't fit completely with what is happening in Pakistan, but after hearing Aitzaz, Wajeeuddin, Iftikhar Chaudhry and others, I believe it's the closest example of the Panama inquiry.

And yes, they said that the inquiry's result may come earlier, but the trial has to take place as well whose results may take time if the inquiry is performed by institutions other than court. Court can also form an inquiry commission to investigate. Since the court is doing the inquiry right now (and court hasn't decided on the inquiry commission), the trial will be very quick. This inquiry may be converted into trial by the bench and general public may not know about it. NOW IF THE BENCH MEMBERS HAVE ALREADY DECIDED THAT THE TRIAL IS REQUIRED IN FUTURE, THEY MAY BE ASKING PTI TO PROVIDE SOME SOLID PROOFS SO THAT THEIR TIME IS SAVED DURING THE TRIAL.

interesting example, it completely fits with current political scenario,
if u got time do watch Dr. Danish recent program with Babar Awan, he raised many interesting points on same topic.

 

[Danish saleem]

Since the proceedings of Panama Leaks began in SC, scores of PMLN supporters and members of media cell have come forward demanding evidence from PTI of Nawaz Sharif corruption. It's a reasonable demand as PTI has been the most vocal of all parties, going as far as threatening the lockdown of capital Islamabad if deadlock wasn't resolved.
Now honorable Supreme Court have taken the matter in their own hands, requesting all parties involved to provide evidence on Nawaz Sharifs purchase of flats mentioned in Panama Leaks. So far both parties have presented pages upon pages of "evidence" which the judges have ridiculed since day 1. They call newspaper headlines from those years flats were purchased as pakora wrappings. Investigative book that details purchase of these flats is labeled inadmissible. Tons of video documentary evidence with contradictory narratives is deemed political statements.
Only thing left now is the actual purchase documents of these flats which cannot be provided by anyone else but Nawaz Sharif. It's the only way he can come clean and conclude this never ending corruption controversy for ever. Purchase documents will include land registery records that would authenticate the date and ownership of these flats.
So you see its really as simple as that. No need to submit thousands of pages to prove Nawaz Sharif is corrupt. Just ask him to provide purchase documents. If he refuses then something is obviously fishy about the whole thing and he must be dismissed for not coming clean on the issue. If he provides those documents and they indeed collaborate with his narrative which he gave on the floor of Parliament, then PTI and others must be punished for failing to provide evidence of his corruption. That would be the most logical and just solution for all parties involved.
@SBD-3 @Danish saleem @Ranasikander @Emmie @WAJsal @Kaptaan @Leader @mingle @Moonlight @PakSword

Brother,

Supreme court also not a investigative agency. secondly we accept or not accept, they have presented the documents in court!
Secondly where are those hundred of Proof IK always chanting about thats the point.

Naeem ul Haq claims to have gotten some evidence.

so what about in last 7 months, IK chanted he have evidence.

 

[Imad.Khan]

Brother,

Supreme court also not a investigative agency. secondly we accept or not accept, they have presented the documents in court!
Secondly where are those hundred of Proof IK always chanting about thats the point.


so what about in last 7 months, IK chanted he have evidence.

Sir here is the proof that you were asking for, this will be presented in the next hearing

London High court papers, where the sharif family was ordered to pay the money owing to Al-Towfeek Company or the apartments will be conficated

P.S. check the date

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/panama-l...s-and-discussion.459474/page-16#ixzz4QdPzJzlN

 

[Danish saleem]

Brother,

Where is the Name of Nawaz Sharif??? in the documents which u r presenting.

 

[Emmie]

Sir here is the proof that you were asking for, this will be presented in the next hearing

London High court papers, where the sharif family was ordered to pay the money owing to Al-Towfeek Company or the apartments will be conficated

P.S. check the date

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/panama-l...s-and-discussion.459474/page-16#ixzz4QdPzJzlN

This Decree has been already submitted & examined as well by the court to some extent. Bud, what you failed to underline is the purpose of entities in the decree. Page 1, para 1, last three lines; page 2, para 1, lines 4 through 12 & scheduled page.

In nutshell -- Scheduled assets to the extent of defendants share shall stand charged with loan amount.

 

[PakSword]

This Decree has been already submitted & examined as well by the court to some extent. Bud, what you failed to underline is the purpose of entities in the decree. Page 1, para 1, last three lines; page 2, para 1, lines 4 through 12 & scheduled page.

In nutshell -- Scheduled assets to the extent of defendants share shall stand charged with loan amount.

So it means that someone other than these three had beneficial interest in the said assets.

What I understood is that, the assets can be charged to the extent the three had beneficial interests in the assets, the rest of the beneficial interest (as implied in the decree) cannot be charged? Which is perfectly fine. So who had the beneficial interest other than these three?