thursday, 13 october, 2022 I 16 rabi ul Awwal, 1444 I rs 15.00 I Vol XIII No 104 I 12 pages I Islamabad edition
Lahore court acquits shehbaz, hamza in money Laundering case g
FIA TELLS CoURT No DIRECT TRANSACTIoN MADE IN BANK ACCoUNTS oF PM, HIS SoN
LAHORE
a
staff report
special court on Wednesday exonerated Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and his son Hamza Shehbaz from Rs16 billion money laundering case registered by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA). Special Judge (Central-1) Ijaz Hassan Awan announced the short verdict reserved earlier in the day after hearing detailed arguments of Advocate Amjad Pervaiz, who represented PM Shehbaz Sharif and Hamza Shehbaz, and FIA prosecution. Both the prime minister and Hamza Shehbaz did not appear before the court
g
SHEHBAz, TWo SoNS BooKED IN Nov 2020 UNDER ANTIMoNEy LAUNDERING ACT
on Wednesday and a legal team submitted separate applications for their exemption from personal appearance for one-day. The court was requested to exempt the prime minister and his son as the premier could not appear due to his official engagements whereas Hamza Shehbaz had back pain. During the proceedings, Advocate Amjad Pervaiz stated that the written arguments had also been submitted in the court. He submitted that no prosecution witness had given the name of Shehbaz Sharif and Hamza Shehbaz, adding that the investigation officer attempted to distort the statements of the witnesses. During hearing, the FIA had told the court
that no direct transaction had been made in the bank accounts of PM Shehbaz and his son from benami (unnamed) accounts. The Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) had booked Shehbaz and his two sons, Hamza and Suleman, in November 2020 under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 34 and 109 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, read with Section 3/4 of Anti-Money Laundering Act. Suleman had been declared a proclaimed offender by the court for his constant absence in the trial proceedings. Amjad Pervaiz submitted that the case was made on the basis of malafide intention, adding that no amount was transferred in the accounts of Shehbaz Sharif or Hamza Shehbaz. He further submitted that as per the law, the prosecution had to prove its case, whereas the prosecution could not present any evidence on the charge of bribery. The defence counsel submitted that he had never seen such a case in his career where the prosecution was contesting the case without evidence. However, FIA Prosecutor Farooq Bajwa submitted that accused Masroor Anwar used to operate the account of Shehbaz Sharif. Amjad Pervaiz submitted that it was against the facts as Masroor Anwar never operated the account of Shehbaz Sharif. The FIA prosecutor submitted that all benami accounts were operated by employees of Ramzan Sugar Mills. The defence counsel replied that the record of the case had been compiled during previous government tenure.
CONTINUED ON PAGE 05
pakistan, Azerbaijan agree to hold fast track discussions on energy collaboration ASTANA, KAZAKHSTAN staff report
Pakistan and Azerbaijan on Wednesday agreed to hold fast-track discussions on energy collaboration between the two countries through robust engagement. The bilateral relations were discussed in a meeting between Prime Minister Shehbaz
Sharif and the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev in which the two sides renewed their commitment to intensify and deepen bilateral engagement in diverse areas of mutually beneficial cooperation. The meeting took place on the sidelines of the Sixth Summit of Conference for Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA) being held here.
Both leaders reviewed the progress of various ongoing initiatives for promoting connectivity, trade and investment. During the meeting, the prime minister underlined the need for fostering close cooperation between the two countries in the field of energy, which was a high-priority area for his government. Shehbaz Sharif informed the
Azeri president that he had nominated the Minister of State for Petroleum as the focal point for bilateral energy cooperation between Azerbaijan and Pakistan who visited Baku during the last month. He also proposed leadership-level consultations in Islamabad aimed at advancing Regional Connectivity which was received positively.
CONTINUED ON PAGE 05
New NAB law to promote systematic corruption, SC observes ISLAMABAD staff report
The Supreme Court bench hearing PTI plea against amendments to NAB Law on Wednesday observed that the new laws would promote systematic corruption as amendments have allowed provision of financial benefits that do not fall within the category of the NAB law. The three-member bench, comprising Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Ijazul Ahsan, heard PTI lawyer Khwaja Haris’ arguments on Imran’s plea, who claimed the new NAB laws “are a violation of fundamental rights”. During the hearing on Wednesday, Imran’s counsel argued that as part of NAB amendments, the decision of the federal cabinet and working development parties had been excluded from the jurisdiction of accountability watchdog. He termed the new laws violation of the international conventions of anti-corruption. Justice Bandial remarked that important decisions in the country are taken jointly by the federal cabinet and committees, and if all its members were to be deemed accused, “who would take the decisions then?” “If the parliament starts doing everything, the decision-making process will slow down,” he said. The CJP questioned the history of NAB law’s application, recalling that cases pertaining to LNG (liquified natural gas) contracts were lodged without proper examination of the facts. “Such contracts are prepared on
the government level.” The top judge said that several bureaucrats were made to serve jail time only to be later acquitted in the reference, adding that “sometimes things are not under the control of the bureaucracy”. Talking about cases regarding assets beyond means, he said that such cases were considered a crime across the world. “We will review the NAB amendments in the context of international standards and local laws,” Justice Bandial observed. Meanwhile, Justice Shah inquired if those who managed to come out scot-free from the NAB laws could be punished under any other law. “There is no other law for misuse of power,” the PTI lawyer replied, adding that after the new amendments, it had become impossible to prove corruption of more than Rs500 million. At one point during the hearing, Justice Ijazul Ahsan observed that the new laws would promote systematic corruption. “The amendments have allowed the provision of financial benefits that do not fall within the category of the NAB law.” Here, Haris said that action against public officeholders could be taken only after proving the financial benefit they had gained. “A case won’t be merited even if the officeholder’s front man and children were misusing the powers.” Subsequently, Justice Shah asked if the amendments would have been challenged if they were passed in 1999.
CONTINUED ON PAGE 05
I was a ‘powerless’ prime minister, admits Imran ISLAMABAD staff report
PTI Chairman Imran Khan on Wednesday reiterated his claim that though he was the prime minister of the country, he did not enjoy power to run the country’s affairs independently. “While running the country was supposed to be his responsibility during my time as the country’s chief executive, actually rule was of “someone else”.” The former prime minister made the latest revelation during interaction with journalists in Lahore. The PTI further claimed that had “half the power been given to him” in his three and a half years long government would have competed with the performance of Sher Shah Suri — the famed founder of the Sur Empire. It is not the first time the PTI chief has insinuated that his government was not at liberty to call all the shots. In an interview in June with anchorperson Sami Ibrahim for Bol News programme Tajzia, the former prime minister
had admitted he did not enjoy absolute power, indicating that the actual centres of power in the country lay elsewhere and “everyone knows where that is.” In the interview, Imran was asked to recall the events of the night of the noconfidence vote against him, who was issuing orders and who had impeded the cases against the PPP and PML-N leaders. CeNtre reSpoNSIBle for ‘AlArmINg’ SwAt SItuAtIoN: Pakistan Tehreek-eInsaf (PTI) Chairperson Imran Khan has said that the ongoing “alarming” situation in Swat was a matter for the federal government and the PTI-led provincial government had been alerting the federal government for a long time. The former premier’s remarks came in response to a journalist stating that the situation in Swat was bad and that the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa chief minister, a member of the PTI, had not visited the area. Imran was talking to media personnel at the Islamabad High Court (IHC) following the hearing for his protective bail after the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) booked him and several
other PTI members in a prohibited funding case. A day earlier, people in Swat staged massive demonstrations to protest against a militant attack on a school van that left the driver dead and two students injured.
The federal cabinet expressed serious concerns over the firing incident on the school van in Swat on Monday, and strongly condemned the incident which triggered mass protests against the regrouping of militants in the scenic mountainous valley.
At a time when thousands of people of Swat are protesting against violence and calling for peace in the region, the cabinet via the official statement merely expressed concerns and condemned the incident without expressing solidarity with the people or its resolve to take concrete action against those challenging the writ of the state. ‘oNly ptI hAd legAl fuNdINg’: During the media talk outside the court today, a reporter questioned if Imran believed the incumbent coalition government would succeed in arresting him, to which he said “maybe”. In response to the claims that the PML-N would hunt him down, Imran Khan said that he had “more stamina than the Sharifs”. Commenting on the prohibited funding case, the PTI chief maintained that only one political party had legal funding and that was “Tehreek-e-Insaaf”. He added that the funding for other political parties was fraudulent.
CONTINUED ON PAGE 05