What does the history-making appearance of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif before joint investigating team (JIT) to investigate corruption mean? Is it good or bad for accountability and democracy in Pakistan? What are the various likely outcomes of the Panama Leaks case now before the Supreme Court of Pakistan?
Why is President Donald Trump being investigated by Special Counsel Robert Muller for the obstruction of justice in FBI Director Comey's firing? Why are Vice President Mike Pence, Trump son-in-law and White House aide Jerrold Kushner and others hiring their own lawyers? Are they too caught up in the investigation?
Viewpoint From Overseas host Faraz Darvesh discusses these questions with Misbah Azam and Riaz Haq (www.riazhaq.com)
India-Pakistan Cricket Diplomacy
Pakistan Cricket Board
London's British Pakistani Mayor Sadiq Khan
Panama Leaks Corruption Investigation in Pakistan
FBI Director Comey's Firing
Talk4Pak Youtube Channel
Bottom ranked #Pakistan proves its resilience yet again. Beats defending champs #India by 180 runs in #CT17final to win #ChampionsTrophy2017
Super victory. Got our butt kicked badly.
What an interesting day. Pak beat India in cricket to give them their worst defeat. India defeated Pak in Hockey to give them their worst defeat. Same day, both in London.
RK: "Super victory. Got our butt kicked badly."
Thank you. Indian captain Virat Kohli has been quite generous in his praise for Pakistan. He is indeed a man of grace.
RK: " India defeated Pak in Hockey to give them their worst defeat. Same day, both in London"
One small difference: Over a billion people watched Pakistan defeat India in Champions Trophy final while the hockey game was barely noticed :-)
Pakistan's national cricket team scored a historic win in Champions Trophy 2017 final against defending champions India on June 18th by the highest-ever margin of 180 runs in any ICC international tournament final. New players emerging from Pakistan Super League and the return of players like Mohammad Amir significantly strengthened the bottom-ranked Pakistan side to beat much higher-ranked teams, including India.
JIT recommends filing of reference against PM Nawaz, daughter and sons with NAB
"Significant gap/disparity among the known and declared sources of income and the wealth accumulated by the Respondent No. 1, 6, 7 and 8 have been observed," said the investigation team in its closing remarks.
In the report, Respondent 1 refers to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Respondent 6 refers to Maryam Nawaz, Respondent 7 refers to Hussain Nawaz and Respondent 8 to Hasan Nawaz.
“The financial structure and health of the companies in Pakistan having linkages to the Respondents also do not substantiate the wealth of Respondents,” added the document.
"Moreover, irregular movement of huge amounts in shape of loans and gifts from Kingdom of Saudi Arabia-based company (Hill Metals Establishment), United Kingdom based companies (Flagship Investments Limited and others) and United Arab Emirates based Company (Capital FZE) to Respondent No. 1, Respondent No. 7 and Pakistan based companies of Respondent No. 1 and family have been highlighted."
"The role of off-shore companies is critically important as several offshore companies [companies mentioned by name] have been identified to be linked with their businesses in UK while conducting this investigation. These companies were mainly used for inflow of funds into UK based companies; which not only acquired expensive properties in UK from such funds but also revolve these funds amongst their companies of UK, KSA, UAE and Pakistan."
"In addition to the companies, Respondent No. 1 and 7 have been found to be recipients of these funds movement into Pakistan as gifts/loans whose purpose/reason have not justified by them before the JIT. Needless to say, these UK companies were loss-making entities with heavily engaged in revolving of funds vis-a-vis creating a smoke screen that the expensive properties of UK were due to the business operations of these UK companies," added the closing remarks.
The investigative team refers to Section 9(a)(v) of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 in its report, which states - "A holder of public office, or any other person, is said to commit or to have committed the offence of corruption and corrupt practices [....] if he or any of his dependents or benamidars owns and possesses or has acquired right or title to any assets or holds irrevocable power of attorney in respect of any assets or pecuniary resources disproportionate to his known sources of income, which he cannot reasonably account for or maintains a standard of assets beyond that which is commensurate with his sources of income...."
"In any trial of an offence punishable under clause (v) of sub-section (a) of Section 9 of this Ordinance, the fact that the accused person on his behalf, is in possession for which the accused person cannot satisfactorily account, of assets and pecuniary resources disproportionate to his known sources of income, or that such person has, at or about the time of the commission of the offence with which he is charged, obtained an accretion to his pecuniary resources or property for which he cannot satisfactorily account, the Court shall presume, unless the contrary is proved, that the accused person is guilty of the offence of corruption and corrupt practices and his conviction therefore shall not be invalid by reason only that it is based solely on such presumption," states Section 14(c) of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, which was also brought forth by the report.
Post a Comment