ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court resumed hearing a slew of petitions seeking a probe into Panama papers here on Tuesday. Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) chairman Dr. Mohammad Irshad and National Accountability Chairman Qamar Zaman Chaudhry are present in court room before the five-member larger bench to present relevant record regarding the alleged money laundering of Sharif family.
As today’s proceedings started, Justice Azmat Saeed inquired FBR chairman as to when the organisation got in touch with foreign ministry regarding Panama Leaks. FBR chairman expressed that the board contacted foreign ministry immediately after Panama papers surfaced but the name of offshore firm and its director was not enough to take necessary action.
He went on and claimed that FBR issued notices to 343 individuals linked to offshore firms and as many as 39 of the individuals were not residing in Pakistan whereas 52 others denied ownership of any offshore firm. Only 92 people admitted setting up offshore companies. To this, justice Asif Khosa inquired as to who filed the response on behalf of Sharif family regarding FBR’s notice.
FBR chief replied that Hassan, Hussain and Maryam Nawaz submitted the response. Justice Asif Saeed Khosa inquired whether Maryam Nawaz in her response mentioned about her status as trustee. To this, FBR head expressed that Maryam did not mention anything about this. Maryam Nawaz’s response as quoted by FBR chief stated that she was not the owner of offshore firm and owned no property outside Pakistan.
Justice Azmat Saeed went a bit furious and remarked that the chairman FBR spent a year for an activity that could merely be completed in seven hours. He expressed that it needed just an hour to check as to who was residing outside Pakistan. He asked FBR official to present record as to when he contacted relevant organisations regarding travel history. FBR’s counsel expressed before the apex court that he did not have any record to show adding that it was true FBR did not take prompt action regarding Panama Leaks.
He argued that 39 directors of offshore firms outside Pakistan could not be verified. Justice Gulzar while throwing weight behind justice Azmat Saeed expressed that it looked the FBR needed 3 decades for verification. He asked FBR head to prove steps taken by the board with relevant record. He went on and remarked that in other words FBR was trying to imply that it did not do anything regarding money laundering.
Justice Aijaz Afzal observed that FBR should have taken immediate steps regarding Panama papers as it does in other cases where it intends to. Justice Khosa in a categoric remark clarified that setting up an offshore firm was not illegal. FBR chairman after concluding his viewpoint before the larger bench, in a brief talk with newsmen expressed that he was a bit scared, however, he got saved. After FBR, chairman, prosecutor general NAB took the floor to clarify the position of NAB regarding Panama Leaks.
Justice Asif Saeed Khosa inquired whether NAB’s prosecutor would represent NAB chairman od assist the five-member bench. To this, NAB’s prosecutor replied that he would assist the five-member bench as NAB’s representative.
Both chiefs were advised to show up before the apex court during the last hearing as counsel for the premier’s children, Salman Akram Raja concluded his arguments regarding the ownership of London flats and offshore firms. Counsel for Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Naeem Bukhari and counsel for Jamaat-e-Islami Taufeeq Asad have already completed their arguments before the apex court.
On the other hand, PM’s counsel Makhdoom Ali Khan also winded up his arguments arguing that the premier could not be disqualified on the basis of speech he had made on the floor of the house.
