Panama Case - Post Verdict Discussion and Updates

[Tameem]

https://twitter.com/x/status/976017543990317056

پاکستان میں الیکشن لڑنا بہت مشکل کام ہوگیا، دوسری جانب امریکی صدر کہتا ہے کہ وہ اپنا انکم ٹیکس بھی کسی کونہیں بتائےگا۔ سپریم کورٹ کےجسٹس قاضی فائزعیسیٰ کے شیخ رشید نااہلی کیس کے دوران ریمارکس

اسلام آباد(اُردوپوائنٹ اخبارتازہ ترین۔20 مارچ 2018ء): سپریم کورٹ کے جسٹس قاضی فائز عیسیٰ نے ریمارکس دیتے ہوئے کہا ہے کہ پاناما کیس لندن فلیٹس کا تھا لیکن نااہل اقامہ پر کیا گیا،پاکستان میں الیکشن لڑنا بہت مشکل کام ہوگیا ہے،دوسری جانب امریکی صدر کہتا ہے کہ وہ اپنا انکم ٹیکس بھی کسی کونہیں بتائے گا۔ نجی ٹی وی کے مطابق سپریم کورٹ نے عوامی مسلم لیگ کے سربراہ شیخ رشید کی نااہلی کی درخواست پرفیصلہ محفوظ کرلیا ہے۔



سربراہ عوامی مسلم لیگ شیخ رشید کے این اے 55راولپنڈی میں مخالف امیدوار ملک شکیل اعوان نے ان کی نااہلی کیلئے درخواست دائر کی تھی۔وکلاء کے دلائل کے مکمل ہوگئے ہیں جبکہ کیس کافیصلہ محفوظ کرلیا ہے۔شیخ رشید کیس کے دوران پاناما کیس کا بھی متعدد بار ذکر ہوا۔ملک شکیل کے وکیل نے پاناما کیس کاذکر کیاتوجسٹس قاضی فائز نے کہا کہ یہی تو کیس ہے جس کوہم سننا چارہے تھے کہ آپ اس کیس کاحوالہ دیں گے۔


اس موقع پرجسٹس قاضی فائز عیسیٰ نے ریمارکس دیے کہ پاناما کیس لندن فلیٹس کا تھالیکن نااہل اقامہ پر کیاگیا۔پاناما کیس میں کہیں بھی یہ اصول وضع نہیں کیا گیا کہ تمام اثاثہ جات ظاہرکرنے کے اصول سے سختی کے ساتھ نمٹا جائے گا۔انہوں نے مزید کہاکہ پاکستان میں الیکشن لڑنا بہت مشکل کام ہوگیا ہے ۔الیکشن کیلئے کاغذات نامزدگی فارم کوپُر کرنا بھی مشکل عمل ہے۔


دوسری جانب امریکی صدر کہتا ہے کہ وہ اپنا انکم ٹیکس بھی کسی کونہیں بتائے گا۔ میڈیا رپورٹس کے مطابق کیس کی سماعت کے دوران جسٹس عظمت سعید شیخ نے ریمارکس دیئے کہ ہم انتظار ہی کررہے تھے کہ آپ سے اس ججمنٹ کا حوالہ دیں۔جسٹس قاضی فائز عیسیٰ نے شکیل اعوان کے وکیل سے استفسار کیا کہ کیا آپ کہتے ہیں اگر ان سے غلطی ہوئی تو اسی فیصلے کے تناظر میں نااہل کردیا جائے ،ْپاناما میں کیس لندن فلیٹس کا تھا، فیصلہ اقامے پر آیا۔


شکیل اعوان کے وکیل نے کہا کہ پاناما کیس میں شیخ رشید درخواست گزار تھے۔ اس پر جسٹس قاضی فائز نے کہا کہ ایک انگلی کسی پر اٹھاتے ہے تو چار انگلیاں اپنی طرف اٹھتی ہے۔شکیل اعوان کے وکیل نے اپنے دلائل میں مؤقف اپنایا کہ شیخ رشید نے اثاثے چھپائے اور غلطی تسلیم کی، اس پر نا اہلی بنتی ہے۔اس پر جسٹس قاضی فائز نے کہا کہ شیخ رشید نے بیان حلفی میں کہا اثاثے چھپائے نہیں لیکن غلطی ہوگئی۔


درخواست گزار کے وکیل نے اپنے دلائل میں مزید کہا کہ شیخ رشید نے انکم ٹیکس سے متعلق دو ڈیکلیرشن دیئے، ایک ڈیکلئریشن میں زرعی ٹیکس دینے کا کہا اور دوسریمیں نہیں۔جسٹس قاضی فائز عیسی نے شکیل اعوان کے وکیل سے استفسار کیا کہ کیا آپ نے شیخ رشید کو نااہل کرنے کی استدعا کی ہی درخواست گزار کے مطابق غلطی جیسی بھی ہوامیدوار کو باہر کردینا چاہیے، کچھ مقدمات سخت نوعیت کے ہوتے ہیں اور کچھ نہیں، مقدمات میں نیت بھی دیکھی جاتی ہے۔


نجی ٹی وی کے مطابق معزز جج نے کہاکہ ایک ایسی غلطی ہوتی ہے جس میں فائدہ بھی دیا جاتا ہے، کیا پاناما کیس میں سخت لائبیلٹی کا اصول طے کر دیا گیا اگر سخت لائبیلٹی کا اصول پاناما ججمنٹ میں طے ہوا ہے تو کہاں لکھا ہی اگر سخت لائبیلٹی کا اصول ثابت ہوا تو شیخ رشید آئوٹ ہو جائیں گے۔شیخ رشید کے وکیل نے اپنے دلائل میں کہاکہ عدالت میں پیش کیے گئے کاغذات نامزدگی نامکمل ہیں،میرے موکل نے سب کچھ ظاہر کیا ہے، اثاثے نہیں چھپائے۔بعد ازاں عدالت نے دلائل مکمل ہونے کے بعد درخواست پر فیصلہ محفوظ کرلیا۔

 

[Dastaan]

 

[Tameem]

https://twitter.com/x/status/976103578749362184

 

[PakSword]

https://twitter.com/x/status/976103578749362184

one judge vs so many judges



Jo judge NS ke haq main baat karay woh acha.. jo na karay woh bura.. lolll

Waisay references ka faisla aanay par saaray faislay samajh aajaeingay achi tarah..

 

[newb3e]

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-43469316

jamhoriyat peh hamla!

kia app aissa saddar chahtay hain jo bar bar court ko jawab day ho!

 

[Tameem]

one judge vs so many judges



Jo judge NS ke haq main baat karay woh acha.. jo na karay woh bura.. lolll

Waisay references ka faisla aanay par saaray faislay samajh aajaeingay achi tarah..

جسٹس قاضی نے جو کچھ بھی کہا - اور جس مقصد سے بھی کہا - حقیقت میں یہ لوگ خود بھی پریشان ہیں کہ نواز کو ہم نے کیوں نکالا
یہ بلکل وہی کچھ ہو رہا ہے جیسے آج تک جوڈیشری اب اپنے جیوڈیشل مرڈر کے گناہ پر نادم ہے - اسی طرح ان میں مونہوں سے آھستہ آھستہ نکلنا شروع ہو ہی جاۓ گا کہ انہوں نے کیا کیا ہے

Copy a very Apt Comment from another Forum.

 

[Tameem]

https://twitter.com/x/status/976325424178434048

https://twitter.com/x/status/976325456470380544

 

[PakSword]

جسٹس قاضی نے جو کچھ بھی کہا - اور جس مقصد سے بھی کہا - حقیقت میں یہ لوگ خود بھی پریشان ہیں کہ نواز کو ہم نے کیوں نکالا
یہ بلکل وہی کچھ ہو رہا ہے جیسے آج تک جوڈیشری اب اپنے جیوڈیشل مرڈر کے گناہ پر نادم ہے - اسی طرح ان میں مونہوں سے آھستہ آھستہ نکلنا شروع ہو ہی جاۓ گا کہ انہوں نے کیا کیا ہے

Copy a very Apt Comment from another Forum.

Educated people know what is being asked from Nawaz and his family and what's his response. This Crook has so much to answer. While I have also been skeptical on the judgement and youy can see it in my earlier comments. He should have been disqualified on many more things rather than only iqama.

As a citizen of Pakistan and a member of tax paying family, I have every right to ask the people who are custodians of pakistan's wealth, including the money I have paid in taxes over the past many years through every available forum, including supreme court, where has this family which was in power in 1990s, got all this wealth. And for educated people including myself, qatri letter is an unacceptable justification.

So I agree with justice qazi faeez isa that disqualification should have been given on many other grounds not just iqama. Thank you

 

[Arsalan]

Check out @iffihalo’s Tweet:

https://twitter.com/x/status/976072275761025025

HAHAHAHHA
What was this???? An edited video i think! It would be hilarious if it happens in real to this extent! LOLZ!

 

[Shane]

Surprise over SC judge remarks on Sharif verdict

No surprise but for the roti ko chochi dawn journalist @Farah Sohail

What else to expect from those who didn't want verdict of Panama to be quoted and threatened the NAB lawyer with consequences if he mentioned Panama case observations regarding Hudaibya case again and then they refused Hudaibya case reopening appeal on grounds of no new evidence...(when the existing evidence alone was enough for a judge to find Sharifs guilty, lol, no thanks to the referee Judge.)

Hudaibya case - A "time lapsed criminal case" in the eyes of three judges including Qazi Faiz Issa, ( lol ) that has a stack of evidence and undeniable proof that cross checks with Ishaq Dar provided detailed (deliberately considered controversial) confession, against the Sharif complete with money laundering evidence and account details, lol.

So I agree with justice qazi faeez isa that disqualification should have been given on many other grounds not just iqama. Thank you

I agree with you on the point of conviction being just Iqama and I posted about it too that they should have included perjury and forgery along with relevant 7 Year jail term in the final Panama verdict.

What Qazi Faiz has stated is not that simple. Even CJP explained the reasons for Panama judgement in IK case but the comments by Justice Faiz should be understood with earlier remarks made by judges relating to JIT not being such gems after all and then in Hudaibya case barring mention of Panama verdict observations of Justice Khosa...

Something seems to be simmering and this situation is more than what meets the eyes...these Sharifs and their supporters are experienced and capable of the unthinkable.

 

[Tameem]

Something seems to be simmering and this situation is more than what meets the eyes.

Exactly, I'm just a layman didn't know legal points but one thing i didn't understands;

If the stakes to prove foreign assets trail is on Sharif's then why SC give two more months to prosecutors/NAB to gather evidences. If in Six months, Sharif cannot produce trail then SC simply put them behind bars...no ifs and butts, why two more months? May be they want to prolongs it till Care takers sworn in?

If in the absence of any concrete evidences of wrong doings by Sharif's, NAB didn't find conclusive evidences or anything. How appropriates for SC to put them behind bars anyways considering (by their own) all assets generates on corruption money but definitely without any proof?

If that precedent is set (Indict without any concrete proof whatsover on just heresay)how many people you think avoids Courts judgement similarly in Pakistan?

 

[PakSword]

If the stakes to prove foreign assets trail is on Sharif's then why SC give two more months to prosecutors/NAB to gather evidences.

Have you by any chance heard about new companies being surfaced?

Anyway, in a trial, all witnesses have to be recorded in case you don't know.... this is a trial and will result in punishment. The information that JIT gathered resulted in conviction (fard e jurm).

Fard e Jurm aaeid ki ja chuki hai just to update you in the first couple of weeks.. Then a chance was given to NS to deny and clarify, which his lawyers are trying hard.. Now either NS will come clean IFFFFFF he is able to deny the conviction by presenting what everyone is asking for so many months.. or will result in punishment.. .

I hope the above will help you.. But if there is any clarification required, you can ask any of the educated members who regularly contribute to this thread. We are here to help you understand what's happening..

===============================

What didn't require a trial (which everyone is pointing out) was perjury.. which was established in SC.. So SC should have sent Maryam and her Abba ji to jail for maximum period..

 

[Shane]

@PakSword...By the way, did any lawyer asked the judge QFI that how he came to the exact conclusion about Nawaz not mentioning Iqama by mistake or deliberately?

How did the judge decide that Nawaz Sharif "forgot to mention Iqama" or he "omited iqama by mistake" in his papers or is it all a hypotheses or guess of the judge - as he was not part of Panama Bench.

If the stakes to prove foreign assets trail is on Sharif's then why SC give two more months to prosecutors/NAB to gather evidences. If in Six months, Sharif cannot produce trail then SC simply put them behind bars...no ifs and butts, why two more months?

It's not an if, it's certain.

It is on NAB to prove the properties/ forgeries/ perjuries / companies and accounts belong to Sharifs.

It is on Sharif to Prove all that legitimate.
It is on Sharifs to provide money trail, tax details, source of funds and prove they didn't commit forgery and perjury but are all legitimate.

The procedure takes time.

It's the Chor tubbers mistake that they did every effort to delay the trial, lol. MAKAFATEAMAL.

 

[Tameem]

Fard e Jurm aaeid ki ja chuki hai just to update you in the first couple of weeks.. Then a chance was given to NS to deny and clarify, which his lawyers are trying hard.. Now either NS will come clean IFFFFFF he is able to deny the conviction by presenting what everyone is asking for so many months.. or will result in punishment.. .

What didn't require a trial (which everyone is pointing out) was perjury.. which was established in SC.. So SC should have sent Maryam and her Abba ji to jail for maximum period..

I accept your argument? Only ask For what purpose two more months granted instead of a instant decision after 6 months of trial?

 

[PakSword]

If in the absence of any concrete evidences of wrong doings by Sharif's, NAB didn't find conclusive evidences or anything. How appropriates for SC to put them behind bars anyways considering (by their own) all assets generates on corruption money but definitely without any proof?

Again.. since you seem to miss so much on this thread.. in many countries, AML laws require the accused to prove the legitimacy of money when asked.. and fortunately for us (unfortunately for Nawaz and his followers) Pakistani laws require the same.. So many public officers have been sent to jail in the past for owning assets more than their income.. same rule should be applied on Nawaz because he is not a holy man.

If Nawaz says that his ittefaq foundries were in loss in 1990s, and he was paying peanuts in taxes.. so how could his teenagers purchase those apartments?

To avoid this, he brings Qatari letter... but a letter alone is not a sufficient proof... Qatari must have presented the investment transactions in 1980s in his bank records against which he says that the investment along with compounded profits reach that levels that he had to transfer HIS apartments to Hasan Nawaz.. Since there was no record of initial investment transactions from banks, NS came up with a weird justification... that the money was transferred to Qatar from Dubai in cash.. lolll..

Now you tell, is this justification valid in the court of law.. Either punish Nawaz or leave all those poor (arab pati) public officers who have been punished before him..

I accept your argument? Only ask For what purpose two more months granted instead of a instant decision after 6 months of trial?

Because you have to record all the witnesses in a trial.. and Mr. Basheer (honorable judge of accountability court) is not running this case on a daily basis.
Wajid Zia's turn has only come now.. after 6 months.. imagine how many witnesses were being recorded in the past six months..

@PakSword...By the way, did any lawyer asked the judge QFI that how he came to the exact conclusion about Nawaz not mentioning Iqama by mistake or deliberately?

I told on this thread long time back.. (I think in December last year) how Nawaz was trying to create a divide in judiciary.. So you can't argue with judges when there are malicious designs in their minds..