ISLAMABAD: Ousted Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, his daughter Maryam and son-in-law Capt. (R) Muhammad Safdar got the first significant relief, though interim, in the past fourteen months, which will considerably impact the national political landscape.
While appeals against judgment of the Accountability Court are yet to be finally decided by the Islamabad High Court (IHC), even the suspension of the verdict and order to release Nawaz Sharif, Maryam and Safdar turned out to be a remarkable political development, which has its own ramifications. The July 6 decision of Judge Muhammad Bashir will remain suspended till the disposal of the appeals by the IHC. The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) that has been under immense pressure and felt cornered due to conviction and incarceration of Nawaz Sharif and Maryam, which has its own contribution in its defeat in the July 26 general elections, heaved a sigh of relief after the IHC ruling.
For now, the Sharifs and PML-N are exalted and feel vindicated asserting that they had been arraigned without having cogent proofs to establish that they are corrupt and dishonest. Maryam is named by the NAB only in this London flats case and is not an accused in the two references pending disposal in the Accountability Court. If she is finally exonerated in the instant reference, she will be free to politick. Nawaz Sharif also wants her to play a major role in politics and the PML-N.
Many believe that the NAB’s performance was disappointing in the IHC as its prosecutors failed to nail the arguments of the Sharifs’ chief lawyer Khawaja Haris. Those holding this view are mistaken because the NAB attorneys staunchly defended a judgment that was universally dubbed as weak, flawed and faulty as the anti-graft watchdog had not been able to present any credible evidence in the Accountability Court.
Apart from the NAB’s inability and incapacity to present anything convincing and compelling against the accused to stand the scrutiny of law, the IHC judgment also knocked down the report of the Panama Joint Investigation Team (JIT) at least relating to the charge about the ownership of the London apartments. The anti-corruption outfit had not done any independent investigation before filing this and two other references against the Sharifs but had submitted them before the Accountability Court on the basis of the JIT findings on the Supreme Court direction contained in its July 28, 2017 verdict that had ousted Nawaz Sharif as the prime minister.
One NAB prosecutor after another desperately employed dilatory tactics to drag the adjudication of the appeals but they all were incapacitated to impress the justices.
More than once, these lawyers deeply annoyed Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Miangul Aurangzeb for protracting the proceedings unnecessarily. The NAB brought in a senior lawyer but he too was unable to change the judges’ mind. It was rare that the Supreme Court imposed a fine of Rs20000 on the NAB while trashing its “frivolous” appeal against IHC’s decision to hear suspension of the sentences.
The judges’ innumerable questions pertained to lack determination of value of the London apartments, which the NAB had not been able to specify, and to the “presumptions” on which the accused were convicted by the lower court. The justices also remarked that when Nawaz Sharif’s ownership of the London properties had not been proven, how and why he can be convicted; and when he has not been established as their owner, how and why Maryam can be sentenced. The NAB prosecutors had no answer.
The suspension of the sentences dented the accountability process launched against the Sharifs which was set in motion with the proceedings on the Panama papers.
It is clear from the chronological order of the Sharifs’ trial that a few months before Justice Asif Saeed Khosa led five-member Supreme Court bench handed its conclusive judgment on July 28, 2017, hearings were held on day-to-day basis. Previously, the same petitions had been rejected terming them frivolous.
The apex court had constituted the six-member JIT, which hectically worked to wrap up its voluminous findings, spanning ten volumes. Nawaz Sharif appeared before it as the prime minister more than once apart from other members of the family including Maryam, Hussain and Hassan. After receiving the JIT report, the Supreme Court ordered the NAB to file references in the Accountability Court in six weeks on the basis of the conclusions of the probe body. Due to paucity of time caused by the deadline given by the apex court, the NAB was in no position to do any investigation of its own. To start with, the Supreme Court gave six months to the Accountability Court to decide the references. Extensions were later given. The NAB filed the references in September, 2017. A monitoring judge of the apex court was also nominated by the July 28 verdict to oversee and supervise the NAB investigations and Accountability Court proceedings.
The Accountability Court delivered its judgment in the London apartments’ case on July 6, nine months after the receipt of the references by it. At the time, Nawaz Sharif and Maryam were in London with ailing Begum Kulsoom.
On July 13, a week after the announcement of the decision, they flew into Lahore from London to offer arrest. They were taken into custody at the airport and lodged in the Adiala Jail Rawalpindi. Before their apprehension, Muhammad Safdar had courted arrest after leading a procession. After their incarceration, they were released on a five-day parole to attend the funeral rites of Begum Kulsoom, who passed away during their detention. The appeals were filed in the IHC on July 14. The sentences were suspended on the 65th day of the Sharifs’ detention.
