Burden of Proof Becomes Sticking Point in Panama

Burden of proof becomes sticking point in Panama case

Burden of proof becomes sticking

A spokesperson for the Hamajima court said on Friday that he would listen to the case of Panamanjad and discuss how much burden the evidence should bear. Five judge-led judges, Asif Saeed Khosa, wanted to prove the innocence of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's family, but the other two were different.

Judge Khosa, nominating Maryam Nawaz Safdar as trustee, referring to the deed of trust in 2006, at the Tehreek-i-Insaf and Pakistani Jamaat-i-Islami petition hearing seeking disqualification of prime minister Nawaz Sharif has effectively rescued PTI. Her brother, Hussain Nawaz, observed that responsibility to prove innocence was transferred to the respondent, the prime minister's family.

The survey was conducted by Neem Bokhari in a letter dated June 12, 2012 to Nasbeth Maduro, Mossa Cocosca Money Rothing Librarian at the Financial Intelligence Agency (FIA) of the British Virgin Islands and a question on Nescoll Limited And Nielson Enterprises Limited - a company that owns four London apartments.

Judge Khosa says Sharifs must prove their innocence. The Azmat and Ejaz judges want the PTI to provide more evidence.
Also, in the June 2012 issue of Mossack Fonseca, Nielson and Nescoll were owned by the same profit-making owner Maryam and acknowledged that the business of the family has been spreading for over 60 years is a source of wealth. The lawyer also offered recognition for the Seda Financial Group, Jeddah, which proved Maryam was one of their valued customers since 2002, stressing that Maryam has no resources to buy London apartments.

She acted as a tool for money laundering for her father, who was a dependent, and claimed to have received gifts from her father and brother.

Maryam Nawaz, Samba Group, and Minerva Financial Services Ltd, so we needed to answer a lot of questions. Judge Khosa wondered if the court should use the services of a forensic investigator to sign Maryam Nawaz's trust deed. Other documents.

However, Judge Sheik Azt Saeed expressed objections that the real question that needs attention is the following questions: Whether the deed of trust is legal, legal, and valid. Whether the two children are obliged to disclose the conduct in accordance with English law; Depending on which company Maryam was declared as the trustee or owner of the company

The judge said the judge informed the court what Bakami's principles were. Bokhari asks the court to deposit all the gifts Maryam has with the court. Father and brother were Benami at several points.

The judge said, "Do not let us see the law, they are still in the" square ".

However, Attorney General Khosa mentioned Article 122 of Qanoon-e-Shahadat in 1984, and the burden of proof is up to the person who knows the fact, and it was always difficult to obtain documents on foreign investment.

The judge emphasized the use of Article 161 of the same law to order the creation of all documents to grant rights to judges authorized to make judgments by law or to discuss appropriate evidence. Corcyers reiterated how the defendants created the paperwork and bought the Offshore Company and how to raise money to buy four London apartments.

"Are we recording evidence?", Supreme Court Justice Saeed. "Then why not charge it?" Judge Khosa observed. "If we start to record evidence, you will not boycott [these procedures]," Saeed Supreme Court pointed to Naeem Bokhari in a lighter vein.

"Is it too much to ask for a document?" Judge Khosa testified.

Azmat added that the defendant had not filed the necessary documents and that he had to bring in documents supporting his arguments to dispute the evidence submitted by the petitioner.

Judge Azmat Saeed intervened, according to the Justice Department's records, that the matter would be over if the defendant submitted relevant documents explaining how Mariam became a beneficial owner of London apartments.

At this point, another judge, Ejaz Afzal Khan, mentioned Article 13 of the Constitution, so that the Supreme Court is not a trial court and is confiscated by civil cases or inquiries to prevent him from providing testimony or evidence to him.

"You (petitioner) must satisfy us about the authenticity of the documents submitted by the court." Dr. Khan added that it is too early to review these documents at this stage.

Chief Justice Said also reminded the defenders of the PTI "do not go to this area". Because the communication he spoke of was "a copy of the document" because he was not sent or received by you.

"You can only rely on Qanoon-e-Shahadat and discard the rest of the law and the Constitution."

"We are trying to figure out the truth." Judge Khosa intervened by quoting relevant Supreme Court rules. He stressed that the court had enough authority to produce the necessary evidence. Attorney General Khan said there is a will under Qanoon-e-Shahadat Article 161, adding, "Perhaps it is the stage where the party should present evidence."

"Put all cards on the table for us to see," Khan's custom. Judge Ijazul Ahsan confirmed that the petitioner did not submit a document proving ownership of the apartment prior to 2006. But Bokhari repeated that the defendant was providing this.

On Friday, the PTI presented a copy of Haroon Pasha, Sharon 's financial advisor, and of the interviews that allegedly provided all the records and documents related to financial transactions to lawyers. On the other hand, Maryam's Shahid Hamid, Ishaq Dar Treasury Secretary Safdar Capt told Dawn that Dawn would submit a follow-up reply to refute the allegations raised during the hearing on behalf of Mariam on Monday.

About Shahzad Memon


Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger.