Reports

Supreme Court Resumes Panamagate Hearing

Supreme Court resumes Panamagate hearing PTI lawyer concludes arguments

Supreme Court resumes Panamagate hearing
The Supreme Court resumed the Panamanian case on Wednesday and sought the dismissal of the prime minister on charges that his family had invested in foreign companies.

A five-member council of frontal courts led by judge Asif Saeed Khosa daily listens to the case. Naeem Bokhari, a Pakistani Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) lawyer, pointed to irregularities between Prime Minister and his children's statements.

Bokhari asked the Sharif family to provide a record of the ownership of the plains of London when the law on bearer certificates was passed by the time of the 2002 remittance. "The Sharif family must provide evidence that the Qatari royal family owns the certificate," Bocarli said.

he said bearer certificate is not a prize bond.

"The foreign company is owned by the owner." According to the law, it is necessary to warn the authorities about ownership of the owner. Judge Ijazul Hassan asked whether it was applicable to the company that was created before the bill passed, and Bokhari said the bill could actually apply to bearer certificate holders. "The Sharif family must prove that all the actions they took were not in violation of the law," Bocari said.

In his remarks, Judge Azmat found that it was not yet established when he bought a London apartment. "According to the Sharif people, the apartment was moved in 2006," Judge Azmat pointed out, according to Bokhari, the Sharif people bought apartments in 1993 and 1996.

Bokhari has also raised the term 'dependent', and according to Black's Law Dictionary, a dependency is one where the cost is borne by another family.

"My daughter, Maryam Nawaz, had no money for offshore companies," he said. "She claimed that she had the talent of Luffy by her father for the purpose."

Supreme Court Justice Sadeed Sheikh Azmat Saeed replied that Hussain Nawaz received money if she believed Maryam Nawaz was a dependent of Maryam Nawaz Hussain Nawaz.

Judge Ejaz Afzal, in turn, asked if anyone living with his father could be counted as a dependent.

Sheikh Rashid takes the floor. Sheikh Rasheed, leader of Awami Awami, also announced his argument in court. "The court knows everything, and we are just here to get help," he said. "If someone is protected by someone, they are their dependents," he argued. Rasheed argued that the Sharif family was hiding in Ratia Butt's novelist Qatar letter. "The Prince of Qatar rescues the prime minister 1122" Rashid continued. "He is a matchbox."

The court laughed at the Rasheed statement and was quickly disciplined by judge Azmat.

"Qatar correspondence is worth more than tissue paper," Rasheed said. "The letter is based on rumors and can not be evidence," he argued. One AML leader accused the government of criticizing all investigative agencies in their pockets, saying, "The Huadipia plant is the mother of all cases."

Judge Khosa urged Sheikh Rasheed to talk about legal issues. "Nobody has challenged the document that marks Maryam Nawaz as the beneficiary owner of the company," Rasheed said.

"Our children do not have IDs at the age of 19, but Sharif's children became millionaires at the same age.The Sharif family must tell where the money is between 1980 and 2006."


Separately, Jamaat Ismaili (JI) lawyer Taufiq Asif said the party wants to establish a commission and wants to investigate all those involved in Panama Ghat. Judge Khosa responded by saying the court would be in charge if it was deemed necessary.

About Shahzad Memon

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger.