ISLAMABAD: Supreme Court of Pakistan (SC) during hearing of the alleged money laundering and tax-theft case against Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chairman Imran Khan and Secretary General Jahangir Tareen, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Saqib Nisar has said that nobody can be disqualified on assumptions, saying that as to how one can say that someone is not ‘sadiq and amin’ without the solid evidences.
A three-member bench of the supreme court headed by Saqib Nisar on Monday conducted hearing of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader Hanif Abbasi’s petition seeking disqualification of Imran Khan and Jahangir Tareen as members of the National Assembly (NA) on the basis of concealment of their sources of income.
“No disclosure of assets is tantamount to the disqualification of a Member of National Assembly (MNA)” observed Saqib Nisar.
Saqib, however, made it clear that the SC cannot disqualify any MNA on the basis of presumptions.
The petitioner’s counsel, Akram Sheikh stressed that Imran did not provide the money trail regarding the transfer of cash from his ex-wife Jemima Khan for purchasing the land measuring over 300 kanals (Bani Gala property) in 2003.
According to Abbasi’s counsel, four different versions on the purchase of Bani Gala land had been presented in the case so far and insisted “this is nothing, but money laundering.” When Imran sold his Landon flat in 2003, “then why did he keep his offshore company, namely Niazi Service, alive?” he questioned.
Submitting his ‘evidence’ against what he termed a ‘false statement’ by PTI regarding party funding to the court, Hanif Abbasi’s lawyer Akram Sheikh requested the court to disqualify Imran from the National Assembly (NA).
“Imran Khan made false statements in his tax returns,” Akram Sheikh insisted as he submitted different documents to support his position. “He is no longer Sadiq or Ameen,” Sheikh said.
“Imran Khan declared his London flats through an Amnesty Scheme in 2000,” Akram Sheikh claimed as he addressed the court. “The flats were owned by Niazi Services and after the sale of the apartments what importance does Niazi Services hold?”
“After the disposal of the London flats, the offshore company became a shell company,” Akram alleged.
Akram also filed a request with the court to bring forth documents regarding the details of Imran’s bank accounts along with those of his former spouse, Jemimah Khan, and the Citi Bank account of one Rashid Ali Khan.
“I request the court to ask for details of a transaction made by Imran, wherein he transferred $660,693 from Jemimah’s account,” the counsel asked the court.
“If someone does not state his foreign income in his wealth or income tax statements then he is no longer Sadiq or Ameen,” he insisted.
“Your point is that he should have mentioned his flat in London and declared his offshore company in his tax returns,” the chief justice noted as he addressed the counsel.
“By quoting relevant laws, can you explain how, if a property is declared via an amnesty scheme, a person can be disqualified?” the chief justice asked Sheikh.
“The flat was sold for $600, 000,” Sheikh responded. “The Bani Gala estate was bought for $300,000. Where did the other half go?”
Responding to the counsel, Saqib said “A person cannot be disqualified on mere assumptions.”
Akram Sheikh nonetheless, insisted that the matter was criminal in nature.
Justice Faisal Arab said that the fraud which does not cause loss to anybody cannot be said fraud and Imran Khan did not have the public position when the contract was made, addressing to the counsel of the petitioner, Justice Faisal Arab said that if your statement is admitted as true even then no loss was done to anybody and no tax was stolen.
“The sale of the London flats and the purchase of the Bani Gala estate are merely tales. This is really a matter of money laundering,” Akram alleged.
“I’m sure you know more about money laundering,” Sheikh asked the chief justice. “Do you believe me to be involved in laundering money?” Justice Nisar retorted to loud laughter in the courtroom.
“So what you’re trying to say is that Imran’s claim that his Bani Gala property was a gift is a lie?” Justice Umer Atta Bandial asked the counsel. “The Bani Gala property was a benami, it could not have been a gift,” Sheikh maintained.
“This was a matter between a husband and wife,” responded the chief justice. “If Jemimah declared the property as a gift, then what objections can be raised against it?” The court issued notices seeking a response from Imran and where he got the amount from to buy his Bani Gala house. At the expiry of the time of the court, the court adjourned hearing of the case till Tuesday.
