FAZAL SHER

ISLAMABAD: Despite repeated summonses, former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s son Hussain Nawaz had not provided documents of retained earnings and yearly cash flow of Hill Metals Establishment (HME) to joint investigation team (JIT) that probed the Panama Papers case.

While testifying before the Accountability Court Judge Muhammad Arshad Malik during the hearing of the Al-Azizia Steel Mills and HME reference, filed against Nawaz Sharif and his sons, key prosecution witness and head of JIT Wajid Zia said the JIT repeatedly asked Hussain to provide documents related to retained earnings and yearly cash flow of any financial year of HME but he did not provide the same.

When Haris asked Zia if the JIT collected documents related to retained earnings and yearly cash flow of HME, the witness replied in the negative. “The knowledge of retained earnings and yearly cash flow of a company is mandatory to know about the assets of a company,” he said, adding that due to non-provision of documents related to retained earnings and yearly cash flow, it was not possible to mention figures regarding it in the JIT report.

The witness also told the court that there is no quantification of cash flow and retained earnings in the JIT report about any financial year of HME.

When defence counsel Khawaja Haris asked the witness during cross-examining about the financial statements of HME, the witness replied that he is not an economic expert. However, he said that he can answer questions regarding the figures mentioned in the JIT report. The figures related to net profit of HME are mentioned in the Volume-6 of the JIT report, he said.

At one stage, the judge asked Haris not to ask similar questions, which have already been answered, again and again. “This is my right to ask questions to reveal the truth,” Haris told the court.

Nawaz Sharif was present in the courtroom during the hearing where he was brought from Adiala Jail amid tight security arrangements.

As soon as, Sharif entered the courtroom, he drew the attention of reporters towards an Urdu newspaper report attributed to him. He completely denied it. He said that he did not even talk to any reporter or politician about the matter reported in the said news report.

The news report quoted Sharif as directing his party to part ways with Pakistan People’s Party as the latter is hand in glove with Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf.

When he was asked a question about the present stance of Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), he said that he did not want to talk about it then.

When Zia failed to answer a question related to portion of net profit of HME, the judge while addressing Haris said, “You have made preparations regarding this matter but repeated desire of Zia for drinking water shows that he does not know about it.”

Zia said that it is correct that the picture of Hussain Nawaz was leaked from the JIT office and it had been viral on social media since. “It is also correct that Hussain expressed grievance over the leakage of his picture and the JIT ordered a separate investigation in this regard,” he said.

He said the investigation was ordered by him and as a result the person responsible was identified. As per the order of the Supreme Court, the investigation report about identifying the person responsible and the department was sent to the Attorney General’s Office, he said while responding to a question raised by the defense counsel.

When Zia was asked to disclose the name of person, the witness said that he is not the competent authority to disclose the details without specific order. “The written order of the court restrains me. The name of identified person is not available in the court’s order,” he said, adding that the specific direction of the apex court for him was to share the name of the responsible person with the then attorney general for Pakistan which he had complied with.

Zia further said the person who leaked the picture of Hussain was working with the JIT at that time.

When Haris prolonged cross-examination over Qatari Prince Hammad bin Jasim’s letter, the judge observed that the cross-examination is conducted over contradictions and not on the contents of documents.

He said he did not ask for consent of Jasim for recording proceedings during which his statement was to be recorded. The JIT has not written any letter in response to Jasim’s letter dated June 22, 2017 clarifying to distinguish between the words “verify” and “investigation,” he said, adding that the JIT responded to the specific issues raised by Jasim which did not include this distinction between meanings of words.

The court adjourned hearing of the case till today (Wednesday). Haris will continue cross-examination.