PTI to wait for SC verdict on Panama before pressurising Sharif to resign

Agencies
July 18, 2017

Islamabad, Jul 18: As the Supreme Court is set to pronounce its verdict in the Panama Papers, the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) on Tuesday said it will wait for the court`s decision before calling on the people to take to the streets and force Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to resign from his post.On the other hand, the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) has warned Sharif that he will be coerced to leave histhis post if he does not resign on his own, reported the Dawn.Sharif

"Our party will wait for the Supreme Court`s decision," PTI spokesman Fawad Chaudhry said.Chaudhry said the decision to wait has been made by the party, adding that the party will not organise big rallies or public meetings till the court announces its decision, but will hold small party conventions at various places."We do not want to give an impression that we have taken out people on the street before the apex court`s verdict, but we want to keep our workers charged so that they remain ready for any call by the chairman," he said.

Earlier on Monday, a Justice of Pakistan Supreme Court, who is heading the three-judge implementation bench hearing the Panama Papers case, said that the Joint Investigation Team`s (JIT) findings against Sharif`s family are not obligatory on the apex court."The JIT`s findings against Sharif family are not binding on the Supreme Court," the Express Tribune quoted Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan as saying during the hearing.The apex court questioned whether Sharif received monthly salary from FZE, an offshore company, as revealed in the JIT report.

According to the report, Justice Sheikh observed that the JIT obtained documents related to FZE through Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) from United Arab Emirates under the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) law as those were certified and not source documents.Meanwhile, Justice Ejaz observed that it was debatable whether the documents could be accepted without questioning the people who signed them.The top court is likely to either put Sharif on trial on corruption charges or even disqualify him.However, the few are expecting the judges to dismiss the case after the JIT submitted a damaging report into Sharif`s family wealth.

Earlier, Sharif`s lawyers and Finance Minister Ishaq Dar, submitted separate objections to the JIT report in the apex court today.A three-member apex bench, headed by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, and comprising Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed and Justice Ijazul Hassan, after the JIT began hearing the case as the JIT submitted its final report on July 10.The report pointed out a categorical foul play on part of the Prime Minister, his children and other family members in their wealth details linked to offshore companies unearthed in Panama Papers.

The report also found respondents guilty of being beneficial owners of multiple offshore companies and recommended initiation of reference against Sharif and his family members in the National Accountability Bureau.In the objections filed before the court, the Sharif family and the Finance Minister rejected the JIT report and argued that the team violated its mandate, reports the Dawn.

Meanwhile, PTI lead counsel Naeem Bukhari in his arguments highlighted certain findings from the JIT report, including the alleged false testimony of Tariq Shafi, who is Sharif`s cousin and a key respondent in the case.Shafi recorded a false testimony earlier regarding an agreement that he made in 1980 with Abdullah Kayed Ahli, the owner of Ahli Steel Company, Dubai in which Shafi held 25 per cent shares, said Bukhari.

The trust deed of the four flats located in London`s upscale Park Lane neighbourhood, executed between Maryam Nawaz and Hussain Nawaz - the Prime Minister`s children - in February 2006, was found to be false by the JIT, Bukhari told the apex bench.The counsel representing Sharif`s sons in the case, Salman Akram Raja, had argued before the SC in February that bearer certificates of the flats had remained with Maryam between February and July 2006. However, they were cancelled upon execution of the trust deed and registered under Minerva Services Limited - an entity that appointed directors for the two offshore companies, Nielson Enterprises Ltd and Nescoll Ltd. that owned the four flats.

The court is expected to either put Sharif on trial on corruption charges, or even disqualify him, but few expect the judges to dismiss the case.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 18,2020

British lawmaker Debbie Abrahams' e-Business visa was revoked as she was involved in anti-India activities and the cancellation was conveyed to her on February 14, government sources said on Tuesday.

Asserting that the grant, rejection or revocation of a visa or electronic travel authorisation is the sovereign right of a country, the sources said Abrahams was issued an e-Business visa on October 7 last year which was valid till October 5, 2020 for attending business meetings.

"Her e-Business visa was revoked on February 14, 2020 on account of her indulging in activities which went against India's national interest. The rejection of the e-Business visa was intimated to her on February 14," a source said.

Abrahams, who chairs a British parliamentary group on Kashmir, was denied entry into India upon her arrival at the New Delhi airport on Monday.

Government officials had said on Monday also that she was informed in advance that her e-visa had been cancelled.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 1,2020

Washington, Jul 1: The United States has approved four coronavirus vaccine candidates for clinical trials, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) head Stephen Hahn told reporters.

"Four vaccines have been approved for moving into clinical trials... and another six are in the pipeline for us to review," Hahn said during a press briefing on Tuesday.

The US Administration launched in May Operation Warp Speed, a joint project of Health and Defense Departments, which aims to deliver 300 million doses of a vaccine for COVID-19 by January 2021.

The country's top pandemics expert Anthony Fauci warned on Tuesday, however, that there is no certainty the United States will be able to develop a vaccine against COVID-19 that works and will be safe.

Data on vaccine effectiveness, he added, may be available in the winter or early next year.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 12,2020

London, Feb 12: Fugitive liquor baron Vijay Mallya returned to the courtroom here on Wednesday, the second day of hearing at the UK High Court, where the former billionaire has appealed against the extradition decision of Westminster Magistrates Court in December 2018.

On being asked about his expectations from the lengthy appeals process against the extradition order as today is the last day for Mallya to present his defence, the embattled former Kingfisher Airlines boss replied, "I have no clue. You see. I'll also see it. Let's not get into a speculative game."

When asked on what would happen if Mallya loses the case and has to return to India, the liquor baron responded: "We do have arguments."

The UK High Court, on Tuesday, had also heard Mallya's appeal against the Westminster Magistrates' Court order extraditing him to India to face alleged fraud and money laundering charges amounting to Rs 9,000 crore.

Mallya was present in the court along with his counsel Clare Montgomery during the hearing. Officials from Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) along with counsel Mark Summers representing the Indian government were also present.

When the judge asked if there was a timeline in the case, Clare said," This is a very dense case," involving multiple individuals and organisations and that not everything had been taken into account by the magistrate Emma Arbuthnot in her ruling against Mallya.

Montgomery contended that the magistrate's ruling had been riddled with "multiple errors". She also brought into question the admissibility of documents submitted by the Indian government - including witness statements and emails that proved crucial in the ruling by judge Arbuthnot, who found "clear evidence of misapplication of loan funds" and that there was a prima facie case of fraud against Mallya.

As she had done throughout the trial, Montgomery continued to assert that Mallya had not acted in a fraudulent manner or run a pyramid and that the collapse of Kingfisher Airlines was, in fact, the failure of a business in difficult economic circumstances.

She also reiterated concerns about the conduct of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in bringing charges against Mallya, claiming that the tycoon had been made a scapegoat.

Montgomery also stated that the Indian government had presented the loan taken out by Kingfisher Airlines, not as a simple business loan but was part of a larger and elaborate attempt at defrauding the banks by Mallya and Kingfisher Airlines management.

This, Montgomery contended, was but one example of a wider misinterpretation of the case by judge Arbuthnot.

The High Court justices reprimanded Montgomery for concentrating on the evidence - in essence rehashing the case presented at the lower court - rather than the apparent "mistakes" made by judge Arbuthnot in her ruling.

Mallya remains on bail of £650,000 as he has done throughout this legal process.

The Crown Prosecution Service which is representing the Government of India will present its case for the extradition of Mallya on Wednesday.

The 63-year-old businessman fled India in March 2016 and has been living in the UK since then.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.