What's new

The systematic removal of Judge Malik to overturn NS's sentence

No pressure on me to convict Nawaz Sharif, says judge Arshad Malik; calls videos 'fake, lies'
July 07, 2019

5d21a4c418a0a.jpg

Judge Arshad Malik in December last year had handed ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif seven years in jail in the Al-Azizia Steel Mills corruption reference. — AP/File

Accountability judge Arshad Malik on Sunday rejected Maryam Nawaz's allegations from a day earlier — that the judge had convicted Nawaz Sharif in the Al-Azizia reference under “immense pressure from hidden hands” — saying that the former premier was convicted on the basis of evidence.

On Saturday, PML-N vice president Maryam Nawaz opened a Pandora’s box with a startling claim that the judge of an accountability court confessed he had been “pressurised and blackmailed” to convict her father in the Al-Azizia reference. A video containing the judge’s alleged confession during his conversation with a ‘sympathiser’ of the PML-N, Nasir Butt, was screened during a hurriedly called presser at the party’s provincial headquarters in Model Town.

The judge, in a press release issued on Sunday, said that he had seen the press conference as well as the video attributed to him. "Serious allegations were made against me; it was a conspiracy to affect my credibility as well as that of my institution and my family. Therefore, I want to present the facts.

"I am a resident of Rawalpindi where before becoming a judge, I worked as a lawyer. The individual shown in the video, Nasir Butt, is also from the same city and is an old acquaintance. Nasir Butt and his brother Abdullah Butt have met me many times at numerous instances.

"The video shown in Maryam Safdar sahiba's press conference is not only contrary to the facts but it is also a despicable attempt to mesh together various instances and topics spoken about, and to present them out of context.

"After Maryam Safdar sahiba's press conference, it is necessary that the truth be brought forward [...] during the hearing of the cases against Nawaz Sharif and his family, I was repeatedly offered bribes by their representatives and also given threats of serious consequences if I did not cooperate," alleged the judge in the press release.

"I decided to stay committed to the truth and left my life and wealth in the hands of God.

"Had I announced the verdict under pressure or over greed of bribes, I would not have acquitted him [Nawaz Sharif] in one case and convicted him in the other," said the judge.

Judge Malik, on Dec 4, 2018, had handed the ousted prime minister seven years in jail in the Al-Azizia Steel Mills corruption reference, but on the same day acquitted him in a second reference related to Flagship Investments, saying "there was no case against Nawaz".

"While dispensing justice, I announced conviction of Nawaz Sharif on the basis of evidence in the Al-Azizia case and acquitted him in the Flagship case.

"I also want to make it clear that indirectly or directly, neither was there any pressure on me nor was there any greed.

"I made these decisions knowing God is omnipresent and on the basis of the law and the facts. This press conference was held merely to make my decisions controversial/disputable and to gain political advantages.

"The videos shown during the press conference are fake and based on lies and assumptions. Therefore, legal action should be taken against those individuals involved in this."

Forensic audit

Following the issuance of the press release, Special Assistant to the Prime Minister on Information and Broadcasting Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan on Sunday said that the government has decided to conduct a forensic audit of the video and audio shared during Maryam's press conference.

She said that yesterday a "political stage" was set for "political point scoring" and it was transformed into a "political theatre".

"In that political theatre, the entire country saw that the faces and body language of the actors that were made to sit on that political stage were revealing that a suicide attack had been conducted on their own party by begum Maryam Safdar," she said, adding that the "so-called chairman" of the party, Shahbaz Sharif, appeared the most helpless.

Firdous questioned Maryam's credibility and said that a few days ago a petition was filed in the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) against her on the basis that a convicted individual could not hold any party position.

She referred to Maryam as a "champion of telling lies".

The government spokesperson claimed that Maryam, through her lawyer, said that her party had not issued any notification regarding her appointment as PML-N vice president.

Firdous added that the whole country has seen that Maryam refers to herself as the vice president and had given the press conference yesterday while seated next to the party president.

"She made it clear that there has been a coup in PML-N."
 
.
Hi,

We are mixing different things--.

The case here is ASSETS BEYOND THEIR MEANS---.

The asset beyond their means cases deal with govt servants---politicians---police officers---personal in sensitive jobs or anyone govt employee---.

The can be charged to declare their assets and prove their assets and shw trail of funds---and show assets are within their means---.

The govt does not need to prove anything---. It is all on the accused to prove---.

This was used to catch spies in the west for a long time decades ago---.

Sir---you have a 3000 a month job---yet you have a sports car---a rolex watch---there are expensive empty bottles of wine in your trash can---you are visiting expensive night clubs---please show where those funds came from.

Then it came to catch bad cops in los angeles and miami area during the 80's when the drugs started coming in---.

Interior dept would start the investigation---Mr. so & so---you get 4500 a month salary---yet you are wearing $200 pair of italian shoes---$800 italian suit---$150 tie---$100 shirt---you are seen at expensive night clubs and restaurants where you average night bill is 250-350 dollars---. You are wearing a 18kt gold Rolex---you are driving an expensive Porsche---would you please explain where did this money coming from---.

Next---now listen this---your father bought a new house for cash---your sister got a new house as well---. They don't have any resource---share with us where did that money come from---.

I can go on and on---that is how the assets beyond means got contained here in the west---.


So---in this case---the state does not need to prove anything---. It can challenge any citizen that the state thinks the citizen has assets beyond his means---and challenge them to prove otherwise---.

Do you think its sensible that the state can accuse anyone of something and not have the burden of proof on them? If the US govt came to me and said prove to us how you paid for everything you own I am not sure I could do it.

My point is not that MNS is innocent. My point is our whole govt and nation is full of corrupt, incompetent people who can't do anything.

Again, PTI leaders continue to say that MNS and Zardari stole tens of billions of dollars. Are we really to believe that NAB can't find 1 cent of those stolen funds?
 
.
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

65997585_2349183798643541_8844559490465398784_n.jpg


Do you think its sensible that the state can accuse anyone of something and not have the burden of proof on them? If the US govt came to me and said prove to us how you paid for everything you own I am not sure I could do it.

My point is not that MNS is innocent. My point is our whole govt and nation is full of corrupt, incompetent people who can't do anything.

Again, PTI leaders continue to say that MNS and Zardari stole tens of billions of dollars. Are we really to believe that NAB can't find 1 cent of those stolen funds?

There is a huge difference between citizen and the person who was 3 times PM. And the law "Burden of proof" was actually introduced in his tenures (under his govt). Your example is more like "comparing apple with orange". A person who was sitting over public exchequer is answerable anywhere in the world.
 
.
Do you think its sensible that the state can accuse anyone of something and not have the burden of proof on them? If the US govt came to me and said prove to us how you paid for everything you own I am not sure I could do it.

My point is not that MNS is innocent. My point is our whole govt and nation is full of corrupt, incompetent people who can't do anything.

Off course, this is what the Law states and this law is upheld in every developed country around the world. The State does not care how you bought a carton of milk. But if you purchased millions of dollars worth of properties without any source of income while holding public office, then the question arises, what was the source of income to purchase these properties.

You destroy your own case by furnishing a letter from a Qatari Prince that this was your source of income to purchase these properties. Then your lawyer goes to the Judge and asks the Judge to throw this letter out once it starts getting scrutinized. On top of that, you submit forged documents by backdating documents with a font in Microsoft Word that was released later.

Come on man, don't try to defend something that cannot be defended. Fact of the matter is, they got caught. Its as simple as that. If they would have just kept their mouths shut, i believe they would have been fine.

Again, PTI leaders continue to say that MNS and Zardari stole tens of billions of dollars. Are we really to believe that NAB can't find 1 cent of those stolen funds?

Most of the money is stored abroad, that's the issue. Its hard to get that money back.
 
. .
Judiciary without any doubt is part of corrupt mafia, but what's benefit of selective leaks? When IK is talking about nabbing corrupt politicians, why not nab bureaucrats, and specially such judges as well because how in their presence justice can be done?

It's happening but a lot slower than our expectations.

Just an observation. In accordance with the laws of Pakistan, judges cannot be proceeded against by the executive, but by the judiciary itself.

But not retired judges?
 
. . . .
If IK is sincere, at-least he can publicly appeal the so called judiciary to clean up her mess. I know current system by design is such that elite have safeguarded themselves be it bureaucracy, judiciary or military elite and for public there's lollipop of frckig 73's constitution. It's also fact that current fuss is all about politicians tried to go beyond their limits in greed and stepped into territory of others. That's why I don't care on which ground anyone of these crook is being canned, at-least they are feeling some heat (even if it's as little as spending some days in jail cell). So, if IK is sincere to clean up, only available option is to do it within constraints and options to manipulate system in place, I don't care even if he had to keep the dogs to hunt p!gs for time being, but he must start delivering result and instill the fear of state in hearts of crooks.

They got color from kharboozas in east.

After the goons of PMLN, PPP, ANP, Diesel, etcc are taking care of. Imran Khan should call new elections after full destruction of these parties and when he has started to collect enough tax within next 2 years and bringing in the people who were making crores of rupees monthly without paying a penny tax. I personally know lots of people in Karachi who make well over a crore a month through different business but pay nothing in taxes.
 
.
Do you think its sensible that the state can accuse anyone of something and not have the burden of proof on them? If the US govt came to me and said prove to us how you paid for everything you own I am not sure I could do it.

My point is not that MNS is innocent. My point is our whole govt and nation is full of corrupt, incompetent people who can't do anything.

Again, PTI leaders continue to say that MNS and Zardari stole tens of billions of dollars. Are we really to believe that NAB can't find 1 cent of those stolen funds?

Hi,

The state does not need to prove in this case of ASSETS BEYOND MEANS---.

It is not for NAB to find the assets or the state to find the assets---.

You have to prove to the state about your resource to buy these items---.
 
.
to the news caster, please pull out the hot chilli bottle out of your *** before you go online

The judge in the saga of yesterday's Press Conference by Maryam responded to the allegations by issuing a press release.

 
.
Hi,

The state does not need to prove in this case of ASSETS BEYOND MEANS---.

It is not for NAB to find the assets or the state to find the assets---.

You have to prove to the state about your resource to buy these items---.

I don't agree with that the constitution of Pakistan places the burden of evidence on the accuser. Again, this is political engineering by vested powers to suit their current fancy. If someone is murdered and you were in the area and you have a knife in your house....in what state would sane people say yes the govt can round you up and then YOU must prove you DIDN'T kill the victim.

Off course, this is what the Law states and this law is upheld in every developed country around the world. The State does not care how you bought a carton of milk. But if you purchased millions of dollars worth of properties without any source of income while holding public office, then the question arises, what was the source of income to purchase these properties.

You destroy your own case by furnishing a letter from a Qatari Prince that this was your source of income to purchase these properties. Then your lawyer goes to the Judge and asks the Judge to throw this letter out once it starts getting scrutinized. On top of that, you submit forged documents by backdating documents with a font in Microsoft Word that was released later.

Come on man, don't try to defend something that cannot be defended. Fact of the matter is, they got caught. Its as simple as that. If they would have just kept their mouths shut, i believe they would have been fine.



Most of the money is stored abroad, that's the issue. Its hard to get that money back.

I agree 100% with most of what you're saying. As I said before I am not defending their corrupt practices. But I am saying where's the money? Two Indian nationals in the last two years ran to the UK after defrauding India of billions. In both cases, India was able to show the crown court here is the money so give us the scoundrel and work with us to get the money back.

I am not saying why isn't the money back in Pakistan. I am saying show us where the $100 billion MNS and family stole is. Show us where 1 billion of that is.
 
.
I don't agree with that the constitution of Pakistan places the burden of evidence on the accuser. Again, this is political engineering by vested powers to suit their current fancy. If someone is murdered and you were in the area and you have a knife in your house....in what state would sane people say yes the govt can round you up and then YOU must prove you DIDN'T kill the victim.



I agree 100% with most of what you're saying. As I said before I am not defending their corrupt practices. But I am saying where's the money? Two Indian nationals in the last two years ran to the UK after defrauding India of billions. In both cases, India was able to show the crown court here is the money so give us the scoundrel and work with us to get the money back.

I am not saying why isn't the money back in Pakistan. I am saying show us where the $100 billion MNS and family stole is. Show us where 1 billion of that is.


criminal law is different from finincial law
 
.
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

View attachment 568311



There is a huge difference between citizen and the person who was 3 times PM. And the law "Burden of proof" was actually introduced in his tenures (under his govt). Your example is more like "comparing apple with orange". A person who was sitting over public exchequer is answerable anywhere in the world.
No there is no difference my friend. Jehangir Tareen couldn't show his proof and yet briefs government. MNS couldn't and is in a jail cell.

My point is what has changed? Selective justice, *** backwards rulings, illiterate judges and politically motivated accusations only allow for the previous bunch of clowns to be replaced with a new bunch who, apart from IK, will do the exact same crap as the last lot.

criminal law is different from finincial law

That is true. I am not a lawyer but let me give you an example. My grandfathers house in Lahore, after he passed away, was taken by a person we had allowed to rent the property. He started to claim the house is his when we wanted him to leave so we can sell the place. We went to court. The burden of proof was on US because we were saying he stole this property from us and made fake papers. Yes he had to also show his proofs, but we had to prove that he stole and the property, in fact, was ours.

Apply that to the case of MNS. The govt is saying he stole. And yet he has to prove he didn't. That is *** backwards. It should be the other way around like it is for REGULAR FINANCIAL/PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS in Pakistan.

But the reality is the state wanted the old guys out and PTI in. So they did whatever they had to do. And the problem with that is it further poisons our system and does nothing to establish a new set of norms regarding ethical leadership/honest governance etc.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom