ISLAMABAD: The appeal against the sentence given to former prime minister Nawaz Sharif in the Al-Azizia Steel Mills reference would be submitted today (Thursday) in the Islamabad High Court (IHC).In the appeal, Nawaz Sharif’s lawyers have stated, “The conviction is illegal and unwarranted by law, based on inadmissible evidence and unproven documents, and on misconception and misinterpretation of law, and is liable to be set aside.”Nawaz Sharif’s lawyer Khawaja Haris has clarified that they have not submitted an appeal against the verdict in the Al-Azizia reference so far, so reports about submission of the appeal and objections on it by the IHC registrar are totally wrong and fabricated.The draft of the appeal available with The News states, “The trial judge has not only betrayed his inherent bias and predisposition while deciding the case against the appellant, he has also exceeded his jurisdiction as a trial judge.”It says, “The judge has completely misconceived and misunderstood the meaning of the word ‘assets’ as defined in Section 5(c) of the NAO, 1999.” The appeal further states, “The judge has held the appellant to be the owner of and thus accountable for even those remittances originating from Hill Metal Establishment (HME) which were never received by him, or are not held by any person on his behalf, and has further included as part of such assets an amount aggregating Rs273.254 billion and $52,460 which were never ever included in or form part of the charge framed against the appellant in the instant case.”It also points out that the appellant in his speech in the National Assembly had stated that the entire record and documents pertaining to Dubai and Jeddah factories existed, however, he never claimed that the said record and documents were in his possession. It says the MLA response does not fall within the purview of the provisions of Section 21 of the NAO, 1999.“The learned trial judge has committed a grave error of law in attempting to nullify the authenticity of Share Sale Agreement dated 14.4.1980 (Ex. 21/9) on the basis of certain statements made by one Mr. Tariq Shafi and Mr. Shahbaz Sharif…The trial judge having totally misconceived and wrongly presumed that the burden of proof in the instant case lay upon the appellant,” the appeal says.It says the prosecution has alleged that the sheer amount of remittances made to the appellant by Hussain Nawaz Sharif or HME was sufficient to prove that the appellant was the real owner of HME. “But receiving of remittance, whether in large or small amounts, only categorises a person as an associate as defined in Section 5(d)(i) of the NAO, 1999, i.e. one who has enjoyed from the benefit of an asset, but does not qualify him to be the ‘owner’ of the asset from which such remittances may have originated,” the appeal says.It says there is no concept of a ‘beneficial owner’ under any provision of NAO, 1999. More precisely and significantly, a beneficiary of any asset is an ‘associate’. “The copy of the Aldar Audit Bureau Certificate that was produced in evidence was not attested as per requirement of law and the auditor who had prepared this certificate was not cited or produced as a witness in the case. The learned trial judge’s finding with regard to the quantum of investment for purposes of setting up ASCL is concerned, the learned trial judge has assumed it to be approximately $6 million, but this is not based on any investigation carried out by the JIT or the NAB,” the appeal says.It adds, “The impugned judgment is based on gross misreading and non-reading of the evidence available on the record of the case…It proceeds on gross misconception and misinterpretation of law and is therefore not sustainable in the eye of law. In particular, objection was raised by the defence to the admissibility of the statements of various persons, (including the accused in the instant case) stated to have been recorded by the JIT during its investigation on the ground that any reference to any such statement by Wajid Zia, Head of the JIT, during the course of his deposition as PW-21, was hit by the provisions of section 162 CrPC and this could not be allowed to be even brought on the record, what to say of those statements being read in evidence.”
01-03-2019, 01:17 PM
Al-Azizia reference: Nawaz?s lawyers to submit appeal today
العرض العادي
