Shahbaz’ son-in-law files £500,000 defamation case against Daily Mail

LONDON: PML-N President Shahbaz Sharif’s son-in-law Imran Ali Yousuf has launched a defamation suit against the Mail on Sunday, Mail Online, and reporter David Rose, seeking an apology and damages of more than £500,000 over an article published last year that had accused Yousuf of stealing British foreign aid earmarked for the victims of the 2005 earthquake that hit Azad Jammu and Kashmir.

The Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), a year ago, had published allegations titled “Did the family of Pakistani politician who has become the poster boy of British overseas aid STEAL funds meant for earthquake victims?”

"The allegations are likely to have a serious impact on his ability to continue to support and or diminish the work of his political family, his and their charitable works, especially in his prospects for raising support and or donations for his political family and or charitable causes,” the particulars of the claim by Yousuf states.

It mentions that the publication reaches millions of people and the article has been shared over 34,000 times.

Yousuf, who is married to Shahbaz Sharif’s daughter Rabia Sharif, is seeking more than half a million pounds in damages from the ANL as well as an injunction to get the article taken down and prevent any further publication.

The Mail publishers have said that the publication stands by its story and the claim will be defended vigorously.

According to Yousuf's claim, Ikram Naveed, the former finance director of Pakistan’s Earthquake Relief and Reconstruction Authority (ERRA), reached a plea bargain deal with Pakistani authorities and admitted in 2018 to stealing money from the ERRA account which received £54 million from the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID).

In the article by David Rose, Naveed was described as the “right-hand man” of the Yousuf, who was identified in the article as “Ali Imran”.

“Naveed pleaded guilty and confessed last November to embezzling about £1.5 million from the ERRA during the period DFID was funding it, of which he passed on almost £1 million to Ali Imran," the Mail on Sunday article had alleged.

“Naveed said half of this was transferred directly from ERRA’s accounts — a claim confirmed by banking records.”

The article had said, correctly, that Yousuf is based in London and has been summoned to answer questions from investigators.

It is interesting to note that Yousuf’s case has been launched by M-R Solicitors — owned by PTI-UK’s former London President Waheed-ur-Rehman Miah.

Speaking to Geo.tv, Miah said, “I can confirm that I am representing Ali Imran as a client. I belong to PTI but in my capacity, as a lawyer, I represent clients who I believe have a good case to defend, as claims made by Daily Mail against him seem to be based on wrong information. My client has every right to defend himself; he has been maligned and targeted.”

The article, written by investigative journalist Rose and quoting investigators and a "confidential investigation report", claimed that the money "stolen" by the PML-N president's son-in-law, between the 2005 earthquake and 2012, also came from the UK's Department for International Development (DFID)-funded aid projects, meant for Pakistan.

"For years he was feted as a Third World poster boy by Britain’s Department for International Development, which poured more than £500 million of UK taxpayers’ money into his province in the form of aid," said the report. "Last year, the head of DFID’s Pakistan office Joanna Rowley lauded his ‘dedication’."

"Yet, say investigators, all the time that DFID was heaping him and his government with praise and taxpayers’ cash, Shehbaz and his family were embezzling tens of millions of pounds of public money and laundering it in Britain," wrote Rose in the report. "They are convinced that some of the allegedly stolen money came from DFID-funded aid projects."

Earlier, Shahbaz Sharif had launched a case against the ANL and David Rose claiming “serious harm” to his “personal and professional reputation”. He had said through the Carter-Ruck law firm that he was left with no option but to seek justice from the court.