ISLAMABAD: The Supreme on Tuesday directed the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to furnish details of incriminating evidences that could establish that the accused had committed an offence in the Hudaibiya Paper Mills money laundering scam involving Rs 1.2 billion.
The court also directed NAB to convince it why it should allow re-opening of Hudaibiya Paper Mills reference against ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif and his family members.
A three-member Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Mushir Alam, Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Mazhar Alam Miankhel told the NAB’s prosecutor Imranul Haq that he would have to satisfy the court that why the anti-graft body should be allowed to re-open the Hudaibiya reference after such a long time. The court noted that it would not allow reopening of the reference until it gets satisfied about the reasons and circumstances which led to NAB not filing an appeal against the Lahore High Court’s (LHC) 2014 verdict of quashing the reference.
The court also sought details of the money trail to determine that the alleged ill-gotten money was transferred to the accounts of the accused from some fictitious accounts in the 1990s.
The judges repeatedly asked the prosecutor to give reasons and convince the court that as to why the Hudaibiya reference, which was filed in 2000 against the members of Sharif family, should be restored.
The prosecutor stated that the joint investigation team (JIT) set up by the Supreme Court which probed the Panama Papers case had recommended reopening of the Hudaibiya reference on the grounds that the money trail of Sharif family was linked with the case.
Reading out the inquiry report, the prosecutor stated that the JIT had examined the cases registered against the Sharif family with NAB and the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and after that it had recommended to re-open the reference. He stated that the JIT report revealed that Sharif family started money laundering in September 1991.
He stated that according to the confessional statement of Ishaq Dar, Sharif family had opened bank accounts in the names of Mukhtar Hussain and Saeed Ahmad to launder the money.
The court asked the counsel to read out the Panama Papers case verdict and tell where there were directions to the NAB to reopen the Hudaibiya reference. The counsel stated that it was observed during the Panama case hearing, however no such direction was given in the final judgment.
Justice Isa noted that the JIT had just given its opinion, and asked the counsel to point out that what criminal offence was committed and what were the exact charges against the accused. However, the prosecutor could not advance any solid arguments. To a court query, the prosecutor stated that the decision to file an appeal against the LHC verdict was taken in a high-level meeting of the NAB board.
During the hearing, the court also directed the prosecutor to apprise it about the legal implications of sending the then prime minister Nawaz Sharif into exile by General (r) Pervez Musharraf. “Tell us as to whether rights of the state or the accused were affected,” Justice Isa asked the prosecutor and observed that the court will also look into as to who benefited from sending the accused into exile. Justice Isa asked the prosecutor to tell the court about criminal charges as the court was not dealing civil but criminal aspect of the matter.
Justice Mushir Alam asked the prosecutor as to whether the accused while holding public offices took any benefit. The prosecutor replied that in 1998, after the country conducted nuclear tests, foreign accounts were seized and during that time only ordinary people could withdraw their money while converting foreign currency into Pakistani rupees.
Justice Mushir Alam asked as to who withdrew the money that came to Siddiqua Syed in Hudaibya account, Ishaq Dar or others. The prosecutor stated that at least Siddiqua Syed did not withdraw the money as the accounts were fictitious. This has to be inquired by the NAB which it did not, Justice Alam noted. Justice Isa said at least NAB should have find out the income tax record of those accounts.
To a court query, the counsel stated that the confessional statement of Ishaq Dar was verified by NAB. Justice Mushir Alam asked the counsel to present some other evidence apart from the statement of Dar. He noted that under the law, the statement of Dar should have been recorded before the accountability court or the NAB chairman instead of a magistrate. “Do not tell us stories and only argue on the merits of the case, Justice Isa told the prosecutor, adding, “We are not in a hurry”. He noted that once the issue of delay in filing the appeal would be settled, the court would move to the merits of the case.
The court later adjourned the hearing till today (Wednesday).
Published in Daily Times, December 13th 2017.
