What's new

Panama leak Case Proceedings - JIT Report, News, Updates And Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok then How many will agree with me on COAS Bajwa asking Mr Godfather to step down till JIT complete its work i.e for 60 days ?

Mr. Bajwa made it clear to everyone, including IK and MNS, that the judgment (whatever it was) will be implemented, by hook or by crook..

Now as the news are coming that Mr. Imran Khan is not agreeing on a JIT while MNS holding public office, Mr. Bajwa itni bajaein ge Mr. Imran Khan ki, ke Mr. Imran Khan shayad politics hi bhool jaein..
 
Ok then How many will agree with me on COAS Bajwa asking Mr Godfather to step down till JIT complete its work i.e for 60 days ?

Humaray agree karnay ya na karnay se kiya hoga? Gen Bajwa will never do tht.. Mark my words...
 
Ok then How many will agree with me on COAS Bajwa asking Mr Godfather to step down till JIT complete its work i.e for 60 days ?

Army has already given their statement in this matter. Army will not interfere in any sense no matter what. SC has tried to get MI and ISI involved in this verdict but Army will not move an inch because it is not their job nor they can afford to do that at this moment in time.
 
"Dil ki tasali k liye, ye khayal b theek hai Ghalib" :)

If JiT was to report back to the same bench, then I would have seen any merit in your post.

But JIT will report to a new bench. Like what the f*ck?! A bench that has not followed the case, that does not know about the facts of the case, a bench that did not hear the proceedings of both parties---how would that bench be able to disqualify sitting PM?!

PS, and I'd say it out loud, I believe that our establishment (military establishment, if I wasn't clear enough) does not want shareefs to completely go away. Bc they are 'useful' in the broad political game. Establishment wants to retain its control over vital affairs of the state....these families keep ruling Pakistan and are allowed to do whatever they want within a certain acceptable limits---and everyone's happy.

If these useful families who are 'controllable' (since establishment knows their black deeds and can bring them down) are gone---and someone like Imran Khan rises up with full force---then our military establishment might also lose out their preeminent role in the state. Something that happened in say Turkey after Erdogan's rise.

So in essence, military would also put itself first before pure interests of Pakistan (even though I'm sure military generals are patriots at heart).

So that's why NS is 'allowed' to stay and ISI/MI might go a bit lenient on him. He might as well be told to 'go'--but his family and party will continue to govern Pakistan along with PPP. Because as I said, that's what more 'controllable' for our establishment and they would not want a completely random varilable (Imran Khan) to come in the picture...

If you are a serving officer---you know of this as well. Somewhere, deep in your heart, you know that too
Of course a view point which may be correct. My hope is based on the fact that the next bench does not have to hear the case they have to assess information collected by JIT against the questions raised by current ordering bench. I am going through the judgement (have reached approximately 50 pages). They have outlined the questions JIT has to ask. They cannot deviate from those questions. The majority decision says that if MNS is unable to provide money trail or for that matter answers to those questions and disqualification reference is to be filled. This means that they have already given a decision if MNS is unable to provide proof of money trail (just not satisfactory answer).

On the other hand there will be a lot of commotion, trailer was already there in NA. So lets keep the fingers crossed. What I foresee is a lot of arson and violence in coming days.
 
Had SC judges found a grain of evidence against NS he would had been Disqualified, the only reason SC asked to form a JIT because court wanted an easy way out and they didn't wanted to become controversial. If SC couldn't find any evidence make no mistake about it JIT will find nothing because their is nothing!!
PTI was doing this drama just so because IK had wet dreams and he thought he'll become PM like this Dharnas, and all that topi drama for dhandli as well found absolutely nothing. I'll say it again stop wasting time like this and focus on your province Mr IK doing all this topi drama will get you nothing.
patwari bhai . agar aap ke moo se kuch kaam ki baat nai nikalti aur bas party fanboyism karna jaante ho to Apka raasta is thread se baher hai :-) jahan fanboyism karna hai karo....Nawaz is a criminal . Dont be blind...thats the reason why our qaum is doomed coz of people like you who still support criminals

I have a feeling in 60 days if the verdict is not guilty, they'll be another azadi march type movement.
not unless people like @Khan Walli Khan still reside in our country who like to lick feet of these criminals
 
Mr. Bajwa made it clear to everyone, including IK and MNS, that the judgment (whatever it was) will be implemented, by hook or by crook..

Now as the news are coming that Mr. Imran Khan is not agreeing on a JIT while MNS holding public office, Mr. Bajwa itni bajaein ge Mr. Imran Khan ki, ke Mr. Imran Khan shayad politics hi bhool jaein..

Chalo dekhtay hain lets wait and see :)
 
18056640_10154659582403137_746764188555429946_n.jpg

:lol::lol::lol:
 
I have read many judgement, but this is unique in terms of start and end. What a dramatic start. In fact the punchline is there in the first para itself
کچھ بھی نہ کہا اور کہ بھی گئۓ
 
You guys are taking the judgement all wrong.

I have read many parts of it and I am sure I am understanding it correctly..

Dishonesty conviction alone is not complete justice. Facts do need to be verified to establish NS as a liar and a criminal.

On 62/63, they have said that these are about legal honesty, not the moral honesty.. You know, what's the difference and how deep this statement is? It means that if you lie while holding a public office, but your lie has not affected anyone's rights, these can't apply on you.. So NS has been proven a liar in Azmat's judgment, but he says that "parliament" needs to amend 62/ 63 to clarify that these will be applicable in moral dishonesty as well..

Aagay aap khud samajhdaar hain..

But it's ok, your doubts or excitement will not make much difference in grand scheme of things

I think you are relying on the grand scheme of things too much.. Similarly, Palestinians are also waiting for the grand scheme of things against jews, without having access to education, science and technology..

It is a wise judgement overall.

It is the worst judgment overall in my opinion.

And IK is also doing the right thing by countering this 'nothing will happen' narrative by telling the public what the judges have said.

IK has changed his stance this morning.. He is not accepting a commission under sitting PM..

Most of us did say that commission is likely and we get JIT that's for criminals!

Yes, we were expecting, together with the suspension of PM..

This is no ordinary JIT either, it is under an Implementation Bench, something we've never had before.

The members will be selected by the heads of the respective institutions.. I think it's enough to understand where would the commission lead, like a headless chicken.. Also, we should expect that the new bench also consists of sellouts..

NS is finished and he knows it all too well.

Yeh baat sirf Allah aur Malakul Maut ko pata hai..
 
Ok then How many will agree with me on COAS Bajwa asking Mr Godfather to step down till JIT complete its work i.e for 60 days ?

He can advise if asked by NS but it's illegal for him to tell NS.
 
I have read many parts of it and I am sure I am understanding it correctly..



On 62/63, they have said that these are about legal honesty, not the moral honesty.. You know, what's the difference and how deep this statement is? It means that if you lie while holding a public office, but your lie has not affected anyone's rights, these can't apply on you.. So NS has been proven a liar in Azmat's judgment, but he says that "parliament" needs to amend 62/ 63 to clarify that these will be applicable in moral dishonesty as well..

Aagay aap khud samajhdaar hain..



I think you are relying on the grand scheme of things too much.. Similarly, Palestinians are also waiting for the grand scheme of things against jews, without having access to education, science and technology..



It is the worst judgment overall in my opinion.



IK has changed his stance this morning.. He is not accepting a commission under sitting PM..



Yes, we were expecting, together with the suspension of PM..



The members will be selected by the heads of the respective institutions.. I think it's enough to understand where would the commission lead, like a headless chicken.. Also, we should expect that the new bench also consists of sellouts..



Yeh baat sirf Allah aur Malakul Maut ko pata hai..

Yaara, let's wait and see. You are at one end and I'm at the other right now.

Grand scheme of things needs to be in view. Theres complete justice and then there's quick justice.

If we want to root out these Dynastic parties (mafia), we need complete justice. Pull the tree with the roots, and not just cut the trunk.
 
Panamagate (minority) judgement leaves Ishaq Dar in tight spot

In Panamagate case verdict, the two judges including Justice Asif Saeed Khosa have directed National Accountability Bureau to proceed against finance minister in Hudabiya Papers Mills case, in which Ishaq Dar had been accused of laundering money.

“The National Accountability Bureau is directed to proceed against Muhammad Ishaq Dar in connection with (Hudabiya) Reference wherein the respondent (Dar) was not an accused person when the reference was quashed by the Lahore High Court”, according to minority judgment of Justice Asif Saeed Khosa and Justice Gulzar Ahmed.

The minority judges’ observations in the case has brought the 26-year old case back to the limelight, which was also one of the main points pleaded by the petitioners for the disqualification of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.

However, Ali Zafar, former President Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan said that the minority judgment remains academic in nature and has no legal binding. Yet, the observations made in the minority judgment can be used for discussion purposes.

In Hudabiya Papers Mills case, Ishaq Dar had made a confessional statement disclosing details of money laundering to the tune of $14.9 million on part of Nawaz Sharif and his family. However, later on, Dar claimed that the confessional statement had been taken by using force against him.

Dar’s lawyer had submitted before the apex court that it would be unjust and unfair to reopen the matter after a lapse of more than 16 years when the Lahore High Court had quashed the case.

In the Panamagate verdict Dar has been called as a “Samdhi” of respondent No. 1 (Nawaz Sharif) five times. His name also appeared as Respondent No 10 in the verdict for 30 times.

The minority judgment noted that in the last two and a half decades there had been a constant murmur nationally as well internationally about Nawaz indulging in corruption, corrupt practices and money laundering with the active assistance and involvement of Ishaq Dar. The two judges further observed that some specified properties in London, United Kingdom had been identified as having been acquired by Nawaz Sharif through ill-gotten or laundered money.

The minority judgment cited Imran Khan’s lawyer, Naeem Bokhari’s reference to a confessional statement made by Dar under section 164, before a Magistrate First Class, Lahore on April 25, 2000. Dar had confessed to laundering money for the benefit of Nawaz Sharif and others and on the basis of that the Reference had been filed by the NAB before an Accountability Court against Hudabiya Paper Mills, three Sharif brothers, Ishaq Dar and others.

However, later on a division bench of the Lahore High Court quashed the reference in March 2014. After quashing of the reference judges of the High Court had disagreed with each other over the issue of reinvestigation of the case by the NAB and thus the said aspect of the case was referred to a referee judge who held that the case could not be allowed to be reinvestigated.

Chairman NAB did not challenge that judgment of the Lahore High Court before the Supreme Court through any petition or appeal.

The minority judges noted that Ishaq Dar was not arrayed as an accused person in the final reference filed by NAB and his status in that reference was merely that of a prosecution witness when the Lahore High Court quashed this reference against the accused persons and reinvestigation was barred.

“Quashing reference by the High Court did not entail respondent No. 10 (Dar) acquittal or smothering of any possibility of his trial on the said charges at any subsequent stage”, according to the minority judges.

The judges further observed that upon quashing of the reference and setting aside of the confessional statement of Dar by the high court, the pardon tendered to Dar by chairman NAB has also ended.

“It is, therefore, declared that after restoration of respondent No. 10’s (Dar) status as an accused person in that case reinvestigation to his extent and filing of a reference against him can be undertaken or resorted to by the National Accountability Bureau”, according to the judges.

FBR grilling

The apex court also did not accept FBR’s plea that it proactively moved against persons named in the Panama Papers. The FBR took the stance that it had taken immediate cognizance of the matter and issued notices to all those named in the Panama Papers.

This, “immediate cognizance” translated into halfhearted issuance of some notices six months after the information came into public domain which speaks volumes about the lethargy, carelessness and inefficiency displayed by the premium tax and financial watchdog of the country, according to the judgment.

https://tribune.com.pk/story/1389248/panama-judgment-leaves-ishaq-dar-tight-spot/

Main ne socha ke hum minority verdict parh parh kar hi khush ho lein.. Ab tu yehi karsaktay hain hum.. I think the majority verdict doesnt talk abt Ishaq dar, hudaibya case at all.. I am surprised, the majority verdict doesnt talk abt Ishaq Dar, at all??? Ye majority judges, ne aakhir kiya kya hai???? Woh karna kia chahtay thay, akhir?

@PakSword @Verve @Guvera

He can advise if asked by NS but it's illegal for him to tell NS.

Bas ye law, legality aur constituition hi le dooba, is mulk ko
 
Last edited:
Main ne socha ke hum minority verdict parh parh kar hi khush ho lein.. Ab tu yehi karsaktay hain hum.. I think the majority verdict doesnt talk abt Ishaq dar, hudaibya case at all..

In Panamagate case verdict, the two judges including Justice Asif Saeed Khosa have directed National Accountability Bureau to proceed against finance minister in Hudabiya Papers Mills case, in which Ishaq Dar had been accused of laundering money.

“The National Accountability Bureau is directed to proceed against Muhammad Ishaq Dar in connection with (Hudabiya) Reference wherein the respondent (Dar) was not an accused person when the reference was quashed by the Lahore High Court”, according to minority judgment of Justice Asif Saeed Khosa and Justice Gulzar Ahmed.

The minority judges’ observations in the case has brought the 26-year old case back to the limelight, which was also one of the main points pleaded by the petitioners for the disqualification of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.

However, Ali Zafar, former President Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan said that the minority judgment remains academic in nature and has no legal binding. Yet, the observations made in the minority judgment can be used for discussion purposes.

In Hudabiya Papers Mills case, Ishaq Dar had made a confessional statement disclosing details of money laundering to the tune of $14.9 million on part of Nawaz Sharif and his family. However, later on, Dar claimed that the confessional statement had been taken by using force against him.

Dar’s lawyer had submitted before the apex court that it would be unjust and unfair to reopen the matter after a lapse of more than 16 years when the Lahore High Court had quashed the case.

In the Panamagate verdict Dar has been called as a “Samdhi” of respondent No. 1 (Nawaz Sharif) five times. His name also appeared as Respondent No 10 in the verdict for 30 times.

The minority judgment noted that in the last two and a half decades there had been a constant murmur nationally as well internationally about Nawaz indulging in corruption, corrupt practices and money laundering with the active assistance and involvement of Ishaq Dar. The two judges further observed that some specified properties in London, United Kingdom had been identified as having been acquired by Nawaz Sharif through ill-gotten or laundered money.

The minority judgment cited Imran Khan’s lawyer, Naeem Bokhari’s reference to a confessional statement made by Dar under section 164, before a Magistrate First Class, Lahore on April 25, 2000. Dar had confessed to laundering money for the benefit of Nawaz Sharif and others and on the basis of that the Reference had been filed by the NAB before an Accountability Court against Hudabiya Paper Mills, three Sharif brothers, Ishaq Dar and others.

However, later on a division bench of the Lahore High Court quashed the reference in March 2014. After quashing of the reference judges of the High Court had disagreed with each other over the issue of reinvestigation of the case by the NAB and thus the said aspect of the case was referred to a referee judge who held that the case could not be allowed to be reinvestigated.

Chairman NAB did not challenge that judgment of the Lahore High Court before the Supreme Court through any petition or appeal.

The minority judges noted that Ishaq Dar was not arrayed as an accused person in the final reference filed by NAB and his status in that reference was merely that of a prosecution witness when the Lahore High Court quashed this reference against the accused persons and reinvestigation was barred.

“Quashing reference by the High Court did not entail respondent No. 10 (Dar) acquittal or smothering of any possibility of his trial on the said charges at any subsequent stage”, according to the minority judges.

The judges further observed that upon quashing of the reference and setting aside of the confessional statement of Dar by the high court, the pardon tendered to Dar by chairman NAB has also ended.

“It is, therefore, declared that after restoration of respondent No. 10’s (Dar) status as an accused person in that case reinvestigation to his extent and filing of a reference against him can be undertaken or resorted to by the National Accountability Bureau”, according to the judges.

FBR grilling

The apex court also did not accept FBR’s plea that it proactively moved against persons named in the Panama Papers. The FBR took the stance that it had taken immediate cognizance of the matter and issued notices to all those named in the Panama Papers.

This, “immediate cognizance” translated into halfhearted issuance of some notices six months after the information came into public domain which speaks volumes about the lethargy, carelessness and inefficiency displayed by the premium tax and financial watchdog of the country, according to the judgment.

https://tribune.com.pk/story/1389248/panama-judgment-leaves-ishaq-dar-tight-spot/

Yeh Article parh kar Ishaq Dar bhi apni seat se uthh kar tazeeman kharay hogaey..

Main ne socha ke hum minority verdict parh parh kar hi khush ho lein.. Ab tu yehi karsaktay hain hum.. I think the majority verdict doesnt talk abt Ishaq dar, hudaibya case at all..

Majority judgement only saves MNS and his family.. I am still reading it.. It is really a clean chit for MNS..

I am surprised, the majority verdict doesnt talk abt Ishaq Dar, at all??? Ye majority judges, ne aakhir kiya kya hai???? Woh karna kia chahtay thay, akhir?

Yeh sab unglion ka kamaal hai... waqt pe nahi chalteen..
 
Ever since RS left and Bajwa came, the signs have been crystal clear. ISI cheif was abruptly removed and send to NUST, the man who actually got the bull by its horn with op Zarb-e-Azb and efforts against financial terrorism, was send packing. The one who replaced, the incumbent cheif is related to Nawaz Shareef. And his deputy, the head of counter terrorism was calling journalist Arshed to sell the narrative that all is well between Army and Ganja. and now to this verdict which is get out jail card for Ganja. People are missing one important point in this verdict, there is no mention of this bitch Maryam Nawaz. They will drag it till election is near and might disqualify Ganja . Election will be held with this bitch contesting, elections will be rigged again by establishment in favour of Noora league and by the time people of Pakistan will realise what happen, the bitch will be your new PM and Nawaz Shareef enjoying his retirement life in one of his luxury villa abroad.

If I was IK I would resign from politics today and let people know what game is being played by the establishment. This gandh in Pakistan cannot be clean from within the system. Something like French revolution is needed which will start the cleaning process from establishment first.


What did I tell you guys yesterday???

Any doubt left now? The bitch was groomed by international establishment to carry on the evil work of her father and now our own establishment, that we feel so proud of, acting like a good pet dogs of their international masters, are following the script to the page.

Bajwa and Naveed Mukhar are taking us back to the status quo.


https://www.dawn.com/news/1328328/apex-court-clears-maryam-in-panama-papers-case


Apex court clears Maryam in Panama Papers case
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom