ISLAMABAD: A five member bench of the Supreme Court headed by Cheif Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali asked both the parties in the Panama Leaks case to decide over the formation of a commission. The commission will comprise one judge and be able to call anyone as part of the probe.
The Chief Justice remarked that incomplete evidence had been submitted in the court. “Naeem Bukhari has submitted documents downloaded from the internet. Such documents are not admissible evidence,” he said.
Justice Asif Saeed Khosa said that when documents are read it is evident that the prime minister’s lawyer has not answered the questions we asked. “To serve justice this matter has to be investigated,” he said. Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed asked, “How are Maryam Nawaz’s expenditures covered?”
Justice Saeed said that according to tax return records, Maryam Nawaz’s taxable income is zero. He added that the prime minister’s daughter has no job or source of income.
“The sources of her finance are gifts that she received from her brothers and her father and agriculture,” Justice Azmat added. “In her tax returns, Maryam has stated her income as Rs21million while her travel costs are Rs35million,” Justice Azmat said.
During the hearing, Justice Azmat told Salman Aslam Butt, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s counsel, that his arguments so far had not helped resolve whether or not Maryam Nawaz was a dependent of the premier.
Justice Azmat inquired after the 43-kanal agricultural land in Mansehra district, which is worth Rs243 million and was declared under the name of Maryam Nawaz by the prime minister in his 2011-12 income tax returns.
“When did Maryam Nawaz give the prime minister money for the land?” Justice Azmat asked.
Salman Butt told the apex court that the land was bought on April 19, 2011. He said that the prime minister had given the money for the land as a gift to his daughter, who later returned the amount to him in the form of the land.
During yesterday’s hearing, Salman Butt, referring to the 2011-12 income tax returns of the prime minister, said his client had to declare the purchase of the agricultural land in the name of his daughter because there was no separate column in the tax returns for independent children.
But mentioning her name in column 12 of the tax returns, Butt had argued, did not mean that she was her father’s dependant. The system would have not accepted the returns had the prime minister concealed the property because it was electronic filing, he explained.
The apex court then asked the counsel to consult with their clients whether they would prefer a commission to be formed to probe the case further or to have the court make decisions.
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has sought time from the Supreme Court to present its opinion regarding formation of judicial commission to probe into Panama Papers case.
The request came after the Supreme Court directed lawyers from both sides to present their opinion on the matter after consultation with their clients.
Sharif family’s counsel Salman Butt supported the move, stating that formation of commission is necessary to fulfill all the legal aspects.
Regarding the formation of a commission, PTI’s lawyer Naeem Bukhari asked for a day’s time, while the Prime Minister’s legal team began consultations.
The hearing of the case has been adjourned till December 09.
Prime Minister’s counsel Salman Butt argued that the Prime Minister had not been named directly in the Panama papers. “The Prime Minister is not responsible for everything which the Sharif family does wrong.”
Salman Butt argued that the records are 40 years old and it is difficult for him to find documents. To this Justice Asif Saeed Khosa said that he was presenting dangerous evidence to defend the PM. “You should rather say I don’t know how the money was paid,” Justice Ameer Hani Muslim said. “All these financial matters were between grandfather and grandson,” Justice Ijaz ul Hasan remarked.
The Supreme Court maintained that both parties are speaking more in the media and less inside the courtroom. “What they say on the media, is opposite to what they say in the court,” the SC maintained.
The court added that when one watches television it seems as if they are talking about some other case. The court said it will give its verdict on the records it has. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf leader Fawad Chaudhry spoke to the media outside the Supreme Court during tea break. “The judges asked about the Dubai steel mill which was sold at a loss. However Salman Butt said that there were no written transactions in those days,” Chaudhry said.
The judges raised question over Maryam Nawaz’s travel expenses, he said. PTI spokesman Naeem-ul-Haq said that the secret Nawaz Sharif had been hiding for the last seven months is out. “Nawaz Sharif is trying to say that he lived in the stoneage.” “There are so many discrepancies in their statements that we don’t need to say anything,” Naeem-ul-Haq said.
INP