London apartments case: Nawaz, Maryam, Safdar indicted

ISLAMABAD: An accountability court on Thursday indicted former PM Nawaz Sharif, his daughter Maryam Nawaz and son-in-law Capt Safdar in the Avenfield (London) apartments corruption reference to which all the three pleaded not guilty. Due to shortage of time, the court deferred the indictment process in the Flagship Investments reference for today (Friday).

The accountability court indicted Nawaz in the Azizia Steel Company and Hill Metal Establishment references too and he has been left the sole accused in this matter. The trial of co-accused Hassan and Hussain Nawaz has already been separated while Maryam and Safdar are not accused in this matter.

The court will resume hearing in the Avenfield apartments reference on October 26 when SECP’s Joint Registrar Sidra Mansoor will appear to get her statement recorded.

The accountability court dismissed four applications of the Sharif family, one after another. One of these was regarding the provision of the JIT report’s Volume X and statements of the three prosecution witnesses also seeking postponement/ deferment of the indictment till provision of the same.

The second application was to start the indictment process seven days after the provision of above-mentioned documents. The third one was filed to stay the trial proceedings as the accused have filed an application, seeking merger of the reference as the allegations in all the three references were the same, before the Supreme Court.

As the court dismissed all the three applications, a fourth plea was filed on the behalf of Nawaz, seeking merger of the corruption references, which was also dismissed.

With regard to the indictment, Nawaz, through a substitute pleader Zaafir Khan, Advocate, pleaded not guilty. In his statement, the former premier said the trial commenced before waiting the detailed judgment in his review petition and on the basis of an interim reference.

“As such my right to fair trial has been prejudiced and constitutional guarantees, including right to life and liberty, have been violated. My fundamental rights also violated due to unprecedented directions for conclusion of trial within six months and appointment of a monitoring judge,” the statement read.

Maryam, appearing before the court at rostrum, added inher father's statement that she refused to accept the charges. “Allegations are based on a report that is baseless, a mockery and travesty of justice. We are being denied [our] right to fair trial and indicted on the basis of a report that is a farce,” she said. Safdar also pleaded not guilty and signed a copy of the same statement.

At the start of proceedings, Amjad Pervaiz, the counsel for Safdar, argued before the court that the prosecution received copies of Volume X of the JIT report, which were not supplied to them. Also, the statements of three prosecution witnesses – Basharat Mehmood Shehzad, Javed Kayani and Saeed Ahmed mentioned in the list – had also not been provided.

Amjad said, “If you read Section 265-C [CrPC] with Article 10 (A), it is quite apparent that indictment cannot be done unless and until provision of all the statements of prosecution witnesses to the defence.” He requested the court to put off hearing in this matter and direct the prosecution to provide them with the documents.

At this, NAB prosecutor Afzal Qureshi argued that the copies of Volume X had not been even provided by the apex court to the accused. “Volume X is about the mutual legal assistance from foreign jurisdiction and we are also waiting for reply in this matter, he added.

Prosecutor Sardar Muzaffar Abbasi said, “Section 265-C is a general law while this is a special court”.

Prosecutor Afzal Qureshi said there was no mention of Safdar in Volume X; hence, its provision was unnecessary. “Statements of witnesses like Javed Kayani, who transferred the money outside the country, and of former National Bank president Saeed Ahmed, who used his personal account for illegal transaction of money, have been provided to the defence. Whatever we got in terms of interim reference, we duly provided all those documents to them, he argued.

Regarding the contentions of Safdar's counsel that the indictment process cannot be initiated before seven-day time after the provision of all documents, Abbasi said the Islamabad High Court already dismissed their application.

At this, Amjad protested and said, “Our application is not dismissed. At least you keep the record straight, which was followed by some cross-talk between him and Abbasi.

Safdar’s counsel said under Section 265-C, the prosecution was bound to provide copies of the statements. At this, the NAB prosecutor said the copies of statements that the defence counsel was asking for were of those witnesses who had not been listed in the interim reference.

He said these proceedings were going on under National Accountability Ordinance and requested the court to dismiss the application – a request that was accepted by the court after a 10-minute break.

As the third application was also dismissed, another plea was filed about the merger of corruption reference by Nawaz. But before the court took up the matter, the counsel for Safdar said he had a long standing in the legal profession, “but it is for the first time in Pakistan's history that three separate references are filed for a single allegation”.

Ayesha Hamid Advocate, presenting her arguments, said she was not requesting for adjournment of the trial. “We are requesting this court to stay this matter till adjudication of application filed before the Supreme Court.”

She added, “It is immaterial that what the number of assets is under question. They may be one, two, three or hundred and can be located anywhere in the world, whether Dubai or London. But it does not make any difference. The main allegation is pecuniary resources are not compatible for the acquisition of those sources. My request is that since the allegation is one, so the reference and charge may also be a single one,” Ayesha said.

She read from all the three corruption references and argued that these were the same. “Whatever the JIT has concluded in its investigation, the NAB whole heartedly adopted the same. Prosecution has disputed Nawaz’s sources of income and for this they produced my client's tax returns as evidence.”

She said, “In all the three references, there are same documents, same version and same sequence of events. For instance, if the NAB prosecution formed three references on the basis of geographical disparity then the Flagship investment Companies and the London apartments were at same location.”

She said it was nowhere mentioned in the Supreme Court judgment that separate references might be filed. “In Supreme Court judgment, Justice Ijaz Afzal has raised questions regarding sources of income and only this thing needs to be addressed.”

Reading out from the SC judgment, Ayesha said there was a mention of singular trial in the matter and “we already filed an application before Supreme Court in this regard”.

She pointed out that a prosecution witnesses at Serial No. 6 is Wajid Zia. “In three corruption references, he would have to appear for recording his statement about more than 3000 pages and then cross examination and court could well imagine how much time this would take.” She requested the court to stay proceedings till adjudication of the matter in Supreme Court.

But the prosecutor, Abbasi, argued that they were seeking stay regarding criminal proceedings and not for indictment and framing of charges. “Criminal proceedings could be stayed in general law but not in this matter under NAO.”

He said the Supreme Court had not stayed the matter yet and requested the court to dismiss the application, allowing framing of charges.

About merging three corruption references, prosecutor Abbasi said in all the three corruption references, accused had been alleged for different roles. “Separate trial for separate allegations is in interest of the accused and not beneficial to the prosecution and court,” the prosecutor said.

He said the assets were accumulated through different sources and that’s why different corruption references were formed.

Later, the court dismissed the application after a short break. During hearing, Jehangir Jadoon, a lawyer for the Sharif family, filed an application, requesting the court to get allocated a spacious place for conducting proceedings in this matter.

He requested the court to ask the federal government for allocation of a spacious courtroom where more people could be accommodated. The judge; however, observed that that neither he could accept nor dismiss the application.

Maryam Nawaz, talking to media after court proceedings, said it was not accountability but revenge. “If someone is bent upon taking revenge, it is better to pronounce another sentence after disqualification, but don't make mockery of justice. These everyday proceedings as a semblance of rule of law are just to make travesty of justice when all their fundamental rights and right to fair trial had been compromised.”

Those carrying out [selected] accountability would also face accountability, she remarked. To a question, Maryam said she and her family would face the cases and they were not among those who escaped court proceedings.

“We came from out of country to face proceedings and we will keep knocking at the doors of justice.” About divisions in the party cadres and her family, Maryam said there was no divide but only difference of opinion. “It is first such case where 'Sicilian mafia' is appearing before the courts,” she remarked.

Meanwhile, former adviser to the PM, Tariq Fatemi, in a very strange move, hit Maryam on her back with a leather pouch in an effort to prevent the future leader from an insect. This shocked the lady and she turned back when Fatemi explained that he successfully neutralised the insect.

Daniyal Aziz, imitating an intelligence agency official whose video was uploaded on social media, put a black book at one side of his face and said, “From tomorrow, we will also come to the court in this style.”

At this, Maryam promptly said a person should not commit such mistakes after which he needed to cover up his face.

Earlier in the courtroom, talking to reporters, said she would try to do her utmost for fulfilment of her responsibility, if the PML-N fielded her as a candidate in 2018 elections. She said, “Media gave quite a tough time to us, but when more and more baseless allegations are levelled, it increases your level of patience. “It is a repeat of 1999,” she noted.

During the proceeding, Maryam kept on with a 'Tasbih', sometimes slowly and sometimes in a hurried manner. Inside the court, Senator Asif Saeed Kirmani to a question about Chaudhry Nisar said he was loyal to Nawaz.

Meanwhile, PML-N president Nawaz Sharif termed the NAB proceedings against his family as ‘murder of justice’. Speaking to media in London, he remarked “You tell me if this is justice or murder of justice”, when asked about his indictment in corruption cases.

He reiterated his earlier claims that the Supreme Court’s verdict in which he was disqualified and had to step down as country’s prime minister was given on Iqama (work permit) and not Panama.

“First there was Panama case, which went on for a long time, then the Iqama surfaced,” he remarked. “So many people in Pakistani have work permits, but because “they couldn’t give a verdict on Panama so they used Iqama,” he added.

“Today’s verdict [of the accountability court] is also related to the initial verdict,” he claimed. “I would have accepted the decision had it exposed any corruption or government taking kickbacks,” Nawaz remarked.

He said, “The JIT tried its best [to incriminate me] and my opponents were handpicked to become members of the JIT,” adding, “Of course, they had to give such a report.” “I think that if our justice system continues like this then we will get nothing but embarrassment.”

On his wife’s health, he remarked that he is in London just because of his wife’s treatment. “She’s in pain so I am with her.” However, he did promise that he will return to Pakistan soon. “I will go back to Pakistan.”   Sharing his travel plans, he said: “I will travel before October 26.”