Aboard The Democracy Train

OUT of necessary respect for the Supreme Court and abundant caution in a matter where a hasty or premature assessment could trigger controversy, the initial response by sensible and responsible quarters to the Panama Papers judgement was to emphasise the need for immediate political and legal acceptance of the court’s orders.
Now that the short but final judgement has been analysed by the legal community, the political class and the citizenry in detail, the implications of it for politics in Pakistan need to be forthrightly addressed.

The consensus in expert and independent circles is twofold and clear: Nawaz Sharif has been stripped of the prime ministership on troublingly narrow legal grounds and the judgement has the undesirable potential to upend the democratic process in the country.

In the circumstances, Chief Justice Saqib Nisar ought to consider, following an appropriate petition, convening the full court to review the five-member bench’s final judgement in the Panama Papers case.

If the democratic project is to be sustained and strengthened, the rules of the system must be clear, fair and transparent. It had been hoped that the Supreme Court would deliver a well-argued and well-reasoned judgement that would create a desirable and easily implementable legal precedent. Instead, the one that now holds sway in the application of disqualification criteria for elected officials is staggeringly wide and could become the source of chaos in the parliamentary realm.

This newspaper called for Mr Sharif’s temporary resignation after the JIT report was submitted to the Supreme Court and has consistently argued that Mr Sharif and his family submit to accountability first in the Panama Papers matter. But Mr Sharif, both as a citizen and as the legitimately elected prime minister, had a justifiable expectation of fair and proportionate justice. That does not appear to be the case in the five-member bench’s final judgement and it has profound consequences for the future of the office of the prime minister and of parliament itself.

The Supreme Court itself can determine the scope of the review, but some of the questions that ought to be addressed are clear. Is, for example, the definition of receivables given in the judgement the only interpretation allowed under the law? What is the scope of Article 62(1)(f) and has it been properly determined by the bench? What constitutes a misdeclaration in a candidate’s nomination forms that can trigger disqualification?

Following Friday’s judgement it is not unreasonable to suggest that all parliamentarians face at least some uncertainty about their legitimate qualifications to hold public office. Whatever the legitimate concerns about many parliamentarians’ lack of financial disclosure, a situation in which one hundred per cent of elected representatives are vulnerable to disqualification is surely too destabilising a situation for a democratic order.

The full Supreme Court must urgently step in and provide some necessary clarity.

Published in Dawn, July 30th, 2017

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan’s Supreme Court on Friday ordered the removal of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif from office over accusations of corruption, delivering a ruling that is likely to shift the country’s tumultuous political balance and deal a serious blow to the legacy of a man who helped define the past generation of Pakistani politics.

The removal of Mr. Sharif, who was serving his third term in office, comes roughly a year before his term was to end.

The verdict means the governing political party, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, must choose an interim prime minister to replace Mr. Sharif until the next general election, which is scheduled for mid-2018.

Announced by the five-member Supreme Court, the verdict caps more than a year of high political drama, breathless court proceedings and a piercing investigation into the finances of the Sharif family.

Watching the courtroom drama was the country’s powerful military, which has traditionally decided the fate of civilian governments. There had been hushed speculation that the court, in coming to its decision, had the tacit, if not overt, backing of powerful generals.

The charges against Mr. Sharif and three of his children — two sons and a daughter — stemmed from disclosures last year in the Panama Papers, which revealed that the children owned expensive residential property in London through a string of offshore companies.

In their unanimous verdict on Friday, the justices declared that Mr. Sharif was not “honest” and that he therefore was “disqualified to be a member of the Parliament.” They also ordered the opening of criminal investigations against the Sharif family.

Imran Khan, the opposition politician who has been spearheading the campaign against Mr. Sharif since he took power in 2013, stands to gain the most politically from the removal of Mr. Sharif. Mr. Khan has doggedly and almost obsessively led the charge against Mr. Sharif and rallied a wide swath of the public against him through a mix of street agitation and court petitions.

The Supreme Court had asked the members of the Sharif family to provide a paper trail of the money they used to buy their London apartments. Investigators found that they were “living beyond their means.”

Despite repeated court exhortations, Mr. Sharif’s family and its lawyers failed to provide satisfactory documentation, the justices said. Several of the documents they produced were declared fake or insufficient.

A representative of the governing party said that Mr. Sharif was stepping down because of the court verdict. But the party expressed “strong reservations” over the ruling and said it was contemplating “all legal and constitutional means” to challenge it, the representative added in a statement.

In 1990, Mr. Sharif was ushered into power as head of the Pakistan Muslim League. As his business grew, suspicions of corruption surfaced. He was dismissed by President Ghulam Ishaq Khan in 1993. The Supreme Court eventually deemed his dismissal unconstitutional, but Mr. Sharif resigned under pressure from Pakistan’s powerful military.

Mr. Sharif was elected again in 1997. Two years later, a military coup ended his term after he fired the army chief, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, and then, according to reports, kept the general’s return flight to Pakistan from landing. Troops loyal to Gen. Musharraf seized the Karachi airport and overthrew the prime minister. Mr. Sharif was tried and found guilty of hijacking and terrorism and sentenced to life in prison.

After spending seven years in exile in a deal brokered by the Saudi royal family, Mr. Sharif returned to Pakistan in 2007. He was cleared of criminal charges and deemed eligible to run for office. Mr. Sharif was again elected prime minister in 2013, but he was met with opposition and faced large protests in 2014. He was tried on corruption charges after the 2016 Panama Papers revealed that his children owned expensive homes in London through a string of offshore companies.

Mr. Sharif has called the inquiry into his family’s finances a conspiracy and has asserted that in his three terms as prime minister he has not been tarred by a major corruption scandal. He repeatedly rebuffed calls to resign and said that he had done no wrong.

The ruling, while expected, leaves unanswered the long-term fate of the man who has been a dominating force in Pakistani politics for the better part of three decades.

“I did not expect Nawaz Sharif to go scot-free,” said Hasan Askari Rizvi, a prominent political analyst who is based in Lahore.

“If he has a long-term vision, he will sit back and guide his political party,” Mr. Rizvi added. “He and his supporters will portray the court verdict as victimization and a grave conspiracy involving international powers.”

Mr. Sharif’s removal from office throws his political succession plans into disarray. His daughter Maryam Nawaz Sharif, who was being groomed as his political heir, was also implicated in the case.

Political insiders say there are several possible contenders to replace Mr. Sharif: Sardar Ayaz Sadiq, the speaker of the national assembly; Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, the minister of petroleum; Khurram Dastgir Khan, the commerce minister; and Khawaja Muhammad Asif, the defense minister.

“Whoever they bring will be a weak prime minister, as Nawaz Sharif would want to have someone who is more or less in line with his thinking,” Mr. Rizvi said.

Mr. Khan’s supporters had laid siege to the Parliament and other government buildings in 2014 after accusing Mr. Sharif of rigging the 2013 general elections. Another attempt to blockade the capital in 2016 was unsuccessful, but it forced the Supreme Court justices to take up the Panama Papers case.

“The whole country is at a standstill due to the Panama Papers case,” Mr. Khan said. Critics said Mr. Khan was pressuring the courts.

Political analysts say the court verdict hands Mr. Khan an undeniable political and moral victory.

“Imran Khan will be strengthened, but it remains to be seen how he capitalizes in Punjab Province, which is critical to winning the general elections,” Mr. Rizvi said. Punjab, the most populous and prosperous of the country’s four provinces, has remained a stronghold of Mr. Sharif for decades.

Mr. Sharif presided over a period of relative economic stability and was able to complete a few large infrastructure projects while reducing the crippling power outages that have long afflicted Pakistan.

But the stubborn scandal over the London real estate holdings sullied the reputation of the family.

Mr. Sharif’s political party nonetheless hopes that his achievements can bring it another electoral success next year even if Mr. Sharif cannot run for office. Mr. Sharif is expected to campaign for his party.

During his current tenure, Mr. Sharif had an uneven relationship with the powerful military. His overtures of more openness toward India, Pakistan’s longtime foe, backfired as generals spurned his efforts.

More recently, relations with the military took a darker turn after news reports detailed how civilian officials confronted the military over what they called a failure to act against Islamist groups. Mr. Sharif had to fire his information minister and two top aides to placate the army.

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, the chairman of the Pakistan Peoples Party, said the Panama Papers ruling was “a real test of our system.”

Some predicted a politically volatile time ahead.

“Until the elections, this will lead to a period of political instability,” Amber Rahim Shamsi, a prominent journalist who hosts a show on Dawn TV, said of the verdict.

“The Sharif political dynasty has somehow managed to survive Pakistan’s rough and bloody politics for over three and a half decades through wheeling and dealing,” Ms. Shamsi said. “It is hard to imagine all the family falling like a pack of cards. Nawaz Sharif has a following and could cash in on political martyrdom to stage a comeback.”

NEW YORK, July 22: Accused Umair Hamid has pled guilty for selling fake degrees at high costs under the garb of fake US colleges and universities. Instead of July 21, he will now be given the final sentence on August 21.

The accused has also signed an acceptance letter to pay $5 million and part of his wealth as fine in the fake degree-selling case.

By calling himself as the Pakistani company Axact’s vice president, the accused started the business of selling fake degrees in the US and other parts of the world at a very high level.

By going through the documents of this case from the US federal court, accused Umair Hamid of criminal case number 17 was kept under the supervision of the US law enforcement agencies. After receiving complaints from various residents, the inspector of the Postal Service Department kept investigating the case with a keen eye and also got support from the FBI. Finally, Umair Hamid was arrested on December 20, 2016.

However, on the basis of witnesses, who coordinated with the government, and proof gathered from various other sources, the lawyers presented a solid case in front of respected Judge Ronnie Abrams.

It should remain clear that the person who brought a bad name to Pakistan, Umair Hamid, was arrested and a case was prepared against him in the supervision of Obama tenure’s district attorney Preet Bharara, who had also revealed the irregularities and frauds of many renowned personalities of the Wall Street and stock exchange.

Accused Umair Hamid, who is also known as ‘Shah’ and ‘Shah Khan’, had pled guilty in April 2017 and is waiting for the final verdict of the court. The accused has signed a written acceptance letter to pay a fine of $5,303,020 and part of his wealth, according to the document number 36, dated April 6, 2017.

This document of the court is signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams, accused Umair Hamid, his lawyer Patrick Smith and the government lawyer David Abramowicz. This initial order of the court is termed as ‘money judgement’.

In another document, the lawyer of Umair Hamid has assured the court, in a letter, that the family of the accused will pay his all related fee. The lawyer also mentioned in this document that there might be a ‘third party’ willing or trying to pay the lawyer’s fee.

In the case, the court has ordered to keep some sensitive information and names confidential. Some other unknown people are being held accountable alongside Umair Hamid in this crime. By going through the record of this case, it can be understood that this case contains a lot of sensitive details and aspects.

However as per the case details, it is not known yet if accused Umair Hamid has appealed to the US government to lessen his punishment or if the accused has shown readiness to further cooperate in interrogation.

In the US system, it is a custom that if the accused provides more details on the case and names of more people involved, then the court would be less strict in its verdict. The final verdict on Umair Hamid case will be announced on August 21, 2017.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Imran Khan, the Pakistani cricket star turned politician, believes his moment of political triumph has finally arrived. On Monday, the country’s Supreme Court will begin a series of hearings in a highly anticipated corruption case that could result in the removal of Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif from office.

“I think he is gone,” Mr. Khan said of Mr. Sharif, his bitter political rival. “The long, dark night is finally over.”

But a top aide to the prime minister said that a verdict resulting in such a removal would be “a judicial coup.”
For more than a year, Mr. Sharif has been mired in a bruising controversy over revelations that his family owns expensive residential properties in London through offshore companies. The information first surfaced last year in the leaked Panama Papers and was vehemently denied by Mr. Sharif.

But Mr. Khan has pestered Mr. Sharif and his family to provide the paper trails for the purchase of the apartments. “Show the receipts,” is a common slogan of Mr. Khan’s supporters and party workers.

The controversy has been a godsend for Mr. Khan, the opposition leader, who has relentlessly campaigned against Mr. Sharif ever since he took office in 2013 and has been on a personal crusade to remove him from office.

Mr. Khan led street protests last year that resulted in the Supreme Court hearing petitions regarding Mr. Sharif’s offshore wealth. In April, a five-member bench of the court decided the prime minister could remain in office but ordered an investigation into the allegations.

Two dissenting judges, however, recommended Mr. Sharif’s disqualification, with one justice equating Mr. Sharif to a “godfather” of an Italian-style Mafia.

The team of investigators, which included civil and military officials, completed its inquiry in the past week and concluded that Mr. Sharif, his two sons and a daughter had not been truthful about their offshore wealth. In a damning report, the investigators accused the members of the ruling family of living beyond their means, hiding their assets, perjury and forgery.

“The report is a pack of lies,” Mr. Sharif said in response.

The prime minister claims that the investigation focuses on his family’s decades-old private businesses and cannot find any proof of financial scandal or corruption in his current or past tenures.

The report caused an uproar in the country, and opposition political parties have united in calling for Mr. Sharif’s resignation. On Friday, opposition politicians urged Mr. Sharif to quit and nominate a new prime minister.

Mr. Sharif — who managed to survive huge street protests last year and in 2014, when Mr. Khan, the opposition politician, and his supporters laid siege to the capital for several months — has refused to buckle under the legal and political pressure.

After meeting his party leaders Friday afternoon, Mr. Sharif said he would stay in office at any cost.
But there is already an air of celebration at Mr. Khan’s hillside Mediterranean-style villa on the outskirts of Islamabad, the capital. Politicians are lining up to join his party. Every day, dozens of sport utility vehicles belonging to influential hopefuls choke the street outside his house, which also serves as his political office.

“Now, there will be criminal proceedings against the prime minister,” Mr. Khan said. “The whole family has lied to the court. The whole defense has been a fraud.”

Mr. Sharif was not named in the Panama Papers, but his sons, Hassan Nawaz Sharif and Hussain Nawaz Sharif, and his daughter, Maryam Nawaz Sharif, were linked to the properties in London. The investigation is particularly damaging for Mr. Sharif’s daughter, who is seen as his political heir.

The investigators say that she produced a forged trust deed about the London apartments. The 2006 document claims that she was only a trustee and not owner of two offshore companies that bought the apartments. But investigators say it was typed in Calibri font, which was not commercially available to the public until 2007.

The investigators also allege that a letter sent by a Qatari royal whose family had been a business partner of Mr. Sharif’s father is fake. The letter supposedly provided details of their financial dealings.

On Monday, when the Supreme Court convenes, it could order the opening of a criminal investigation against the prime minister and his children after they are given a chance to respond to the investigation. But Mr. Khan is hoping that the justices, after having gone through the investigative report, will immediately remove Mr. Sharif under Article 62 and 63 of the Constitution, which calls for the disqualification of any lawmaker found to be dishonest.

Government officials, on the other hand, say that they expect a prolonged bitter legal battle.
“There is no precedent of the court using Article 62 and 63,” Zafarullah Khan, the minister of state for law and justice and a top aide to the prime minister, said in an interview. “If a new history is to be made, I cannot say, but there is not a single precedent.”

He also said Mr. Sharif’s legal team planned to challenge the findings of the investigation team. “We have confidence in the Supreme Court,” said Mr. Khan, who is not related to Imran Khan. “The so-called evidences gathered by the investigative team are based on ‘sourced reports’ and don’t have evidentiary value.”

He added: “It is a political case. The opposition parties are using the shoulder of the courts to have a judicial coup.”

The minister said that the ruling party, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, or PML-N, was standing firmly behind the prime minister. “There is a political upheaval, but it has been so for the last four years,” he said. “The opposition has been demanding resignation from Day 1. So what?”

The minister’s nonchalance, however, belied the pressure the government is facing. Back-to-back meetings were taking place among top government officials, aides and party leaders.

Other opposition politicians say they believe that the prime minister is running out of time. “The situation is very serious for Nawaz Sharif,” Moonis Elahi, an opposition politician, said. “I don’t see how the Sharifs can refute the documents they themselves presented to the court.”

Mr. Elahi said the prime minister had no one but himself to blame for the latest crisis. “Someone who has had so much power, he cannot cry foul,” Mr. Elahi said. “In the past, the Sharif family managed to manipulate the judicial system. But this time, we have a very different kind of judiciary.”

Opponents say that Mr. Sharif, who himself chose the current army and intelligence chiefs, cannot portray himself to be a victim of a conspiracy.

But Mr. Sharif, who has had a tense relationship with the country’s military, has said that, indeed, a conspiracy was hatched against him. And some of his loyalists have alleged, in veiled terms, that the country’s spy agency provided the investigation team with evidence against the ruling family.

Imran Khan, the opposition politician, said he expected early elections, as soon as this fall, if the court removes Mr. Sharif. But other major opposition parties say the current Parliament should continue its term until 2018, when elections are next scheduled.

Nevertheless, Mr. Khan said of Mr. Sharif: “I hope next week is his last week. You know that Elton John song ‘Goodbye, Yellow Brick Road’ — I am hoping there will be a big goodbye reception for Nawaz Sharif in Islamabad next week.”

ISLAMABAD, July 14: Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has said that governments had been toppled in the country on accusations of corruption and being a ‘security risk’ in the past.

PM Nawaz was chairing the parliamentary meeting of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz here Friday.
During the meeting, the Premier reiterated his decision not to step down from office on the call of opposition, saying that he would continue to fight for the people of Pakistan till the end.

Nawaz Sharif went on to say that he had done nothing wrong and his conscience was clear.

Members of the parliamentary party overwhelmingly participated in the meeting, summoned to chalk out strategy in response to the opposition’s calls for the premier’s resignation following the submission of the Panama case Joint Investigation Team (JIT) report in the Supreme Court.

Sources said the members warmly welcomed PM Nawaz by thumping desks on his arrival for the meeting at the PM House.

Sources said at the beginning of the meeting, legal experts gave a briefing on the JIT report and the government’s potential response in the Supreme Court.

On Thursday, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif while chairing meeting of federal cabinet explicitly dismissed JIT report that has raised questions about the source of his family´s wealth, rejecting it as slander.

Nawaz Sharif, serving his third term as prime minister, faces opposition calls to step down but he was defiant in his condemnation of the report that alleges his family´s income from business was not large enough to explain its wealth.

Amid loud thumping of desks by the Federal Cabinet members, confident and resolute Prime Minister said he was not going to resign and those seeking his resignation must come up with solid proof against him.

“I have no burden on my conscience by the grace of Allah. I haven’t done anything wrong. Our family has gained nothing from politics but lost a lot,” he said while chairing meeting of the Federal Cabinet.

The cabinet reposed full confidence in the leadership of the prime minister and endorsed his firm decision not to step down.

Addressing the cabinet, he asked: “Should I resign on the demand of anti-democracy forces? Why should I resign and on what basis? I was brought into power by the mandate of the people and only the people have the mandate to remove me.”

Chairman National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Qamar Zaman Chaudhry has revealed to the Panama Joint Investigation Team (JIT) that a case against Sharif Trust was under investigation when he took charge of the accountability bureau.

Chaudhry in his statement said the first family was accused of laundering millions through the Sharif Trust.
“The allegations further proved that the Sharif family’s accounts were not audited,” he said in his statement before the JIT.

“The Sharif family was accused of purchasing ‘un-named properties’,” he added.

Chaudhry had also stated that NAB Lahore was asked to collect details of the properties in order to forward a mutual legal assistance request to the British government.

“Due to lack of information, NAB could not request for mutual legal assistance for the property.”

The case, initiated in 2000, was heard by the Lahore High Court (LHC) and the apex court, added Chaudhry.

He further said efforts to obtain records were not evident from the relevant files.

“I assigned the case’s responsibility to a different officer and the process of collecting the record is underway now,” Chaudhry told the investigation team.

The statement further said that during investigations, it surfaced that records from the required time period were not available.

Another case against the premier revolved around Raiwind Road’s construction and was started by NAB Lahore and sent to NAB headquarters, the NAB Chairman’s statement added.

“NAB headquarters raised a few questions on the case and further investigations into the case are underway in the region,” he said.

An inquiry and two investigations against the prime minister and chief minister Punjab are underway according to Chaudhry’s statement.

The investigations and inquiry are regarding illegal use of authority in allotment of a Lahore Development Authority (LDA) plot.

The report submitted by the JIT to the SC states that investigations into all cases are underway and will soon be given a final shape.

“Hudaibiya Paper reference, Raiwind Estate reference, and willful loan default case were all dismissed by the LHC,” Chaudhry told the investigation team.

“Acting upon the advice of NAB prosecutor K.K. Agha, I did not file an appeal.”

The NAB prosecutor has an independent office in the bureau, formed for the department’s legal guidance, he added.