Court rejected plea of counsel for Nawaz

FAZAL SHER

ISLAMABAD: The Accountability Court on Tuesday rejected an application filed by the counsel for deposed Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for postponing final arguments in the Avenfield reference till recording of evidence in other two references is completed.

Following dismissal of the application by Accountability Court Judge Muhammad Bashir, Deputy Prosecutor General National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Sardar Muzaffar Abbasi started making closing arguments in the Avenfield reference.

At the outset of hearing, Sharif’s counsel Barrister Saad Hashmi submitted an application before the court and prayed to postpone the final arguments in the Avenfield reference till the recording of evidence in other two references – Al-Azizia Steel Mills and Flagship Investments. Final arguments in all the three references filed against Sharif family should be heard simultaneously, he pleaded. Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, his daughter Maryam Nawaz and son-in-law Captain Muhammad Safdar (retd) were present in the court during the hearing; they were later allowed to go.

Hashmi while arguing before the court said the two references – Al-Azizia and Flagship – involve the same evidence, a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) report and a common witness, Wajid Zia; therefore, final arguments in the Avenfield reference should be delayed till recording of evidence in other two references. He said that prosecution has created misconceptions and misled the court that defense has failed produce its witnesses. There is no need of producing any witness as the prosecution has failed to establish the case, he said, adding that all the three cases involve an identical matter and must be decided simultaneously.

Abbasi while objecting to the application filed by the defense said that the prosecution is ready for final arguments in the Avenfield reference but the defence is making an attempt to delay final arguments.

He said that the statements of accused Nawaz Sharif, Maryam Nawaz and Capitan Muhammad Safdar (retd) have been recorded under section 342 and they could not produce any witness in their defense.

Abbasi said that the court had fixed the case for final arguments in the presence of the counsel for both sides, but the defense seems to be reluctant to argue the case. “It is no where written in law that unless all the cases are concluded, they will not argue finally,” he said. He requested the court to dismiss the application and hear final arguments in the Avenfield reference.

The accountability court judge after dismissing the application observed, “You may challenge this verdict in Islamabad High Court (IHC).” The court observed that till that time the cross-examination of key prosecution Wajid Zia will continue.

After dismissal of application, Abbasi in his final arguments stated that this is an admitted fact that the Avenfield properties have been in the possession of the Sharif family since 1993. “The NAB has fulfilled its responsibility and now the burden of proof lies with the accused to explain their position but they have not produced a single witness in their defense,” he said. He said the accused did not appear before NAB investigation team despite issuance of a call-up notice to them which shows that the defence side does not have iota of evidence in their defense. The accused person, Nawaz Sharif, is not an ordinary man as he is the only former three-time elected prime minister in the history of the country, he said.

Abbasi said that the NAB team had visited London to collect evidence to establish its case and record the statement of forensic expert Robert W Radley via a video link as a witness. The accused did not produce any witness regarding fake trust deeds, he said, adding that they can produce Jeremy Freeman as witness but they could not produce him.

The NAB prosecutor said if it is admitted that JIT did not record the statement of Qatari royal prince Hamad bin Jassim intentionally then why defense could not produce him in its defense.

Abbasi further said that bearer-shares certificate of Nielson and Nescoll, which hold London properties, had been in the possession of the accused before 2006 but after changes in BVI Business Companies Act 2004, they had to disclose bearer-shares. “If new law had not been framed in BVI in 2004, we would have still been unable to establish our case,” he said.

He said that documents produced by NAB before the court have been acquired through official channels. JIT head Wajid Zia, NAB investigation officer Imran Dogar and Robert Radley have no enmity with the Sharif family.

Abbasi said that Supreme Court had ordered NAB to file three references against the Sharif family within six weeks. The accused Sharif was disqualified after the July 28 verdict of the apex court. The suspects were indicted on October 19, 2017, while a supplementary reference was filed on January 22, 2018 against the accused.

He said that as many as 18 witnesses have recorded their statements in the Avenfield reference but the accused have failed to prove their innocence in the case. Abbasi will continue his arguments on Wednesday (today).