Low Graphics Site

 






|

|
|
|
November 6, 2003
|
Thursday
|
Ramazan 10, 1424
|

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Swiss police tribunal upholds Benazir’s appeal
ISLAMABAD, Nov 5: A Swiss police tribunal has upheld an appeal by former prime minister Benazir Bhutto and her spouse against a 12-million dollar money laundering conviction, her spokesman said here on Wednesday.
“The Geneva police tribunal has accepted her appeal and quashed the six-month suspended sentence ordered by Daniel Devaud,” PPP (People’s Party Parliamentarian) spokesman Senator Farhatullah Babar, told AFP.
Ms Benazir, her husband Asif Ali Zardari, and their Swiss lawyer were convicted by Geneva-based magistrate Daniel Devaud on July 30 of obtaining the money in illegal commissions from two Swiss companies for a 1994 customs inspection contract.
Senator Babar asked the government to accept the decision of the Swiss police tribunal and stop squandering public money on appeal against the decision, adds Dawn’s Staff Reporter.
He said here on Wednesday that the Geneva police tribunal’s decision would now go to the Swiss attorney-general who would decide whether or not to further proceed in the case.
Senator Babar said the government had carried out a thorough investigation into the alleged corruption of Ms Bhutto in the award of the contract to the SGS firm. However, he added, when it failed to produce any evidence, it stopped pursuing corruption charges against the SGS company but continued its “political vendetta against the PPP leadership”.
He further said that the regime had terminated its contracts with two detective agencies it had hired specifically for the purpose of unearthing ‘something’ against the PPP chairperson.
“The fact that these contracts were terminated after having doled out millions of dollars over the last seven years and on the eve of hearings before the Geneva police tribunal is a proof that the regime is involved in a politically-motivated drama,” he said.
The PPP senator said now that the matter “has been quashed”, the Musharraf regime would have to decide whether to accept the decision or to appeal against it before the Swiss authorities. He asked the regime to end its persecution and stop wasting public money on proving a “politically-motivated charge.”
AMIN FAHIM: Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy chairman and PPP president Makhdoom Amin Fahim has welcomed the tribunal’s decision, and said the “quashment has vindicated the party’s stand” that cases against its leadership “are false and based on perjured evidence.”
In a statement here, Mr Fahim said the PPP had all along maintained that Devaud’s verdict was “politically-motivated.”
Mr Devaud, he recalled, had given his order on the last day in the office, and communicated it to the Swiss government four days later.
He criticized the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and the regime for using Mr Devaud’s findings for character assassination and media trial of Ms Bhutto in the country.
GOVT VERSION: Meanwhile, NAB said the judges of the Misdemeanour Court had remanded the case of Ms Bhutto and Mr Zardari to the attorney-general to be tried by a jury.
Giving their version on the proceedings of the Misdemeanour Court to whom Ms Bhutto and Mr Zardari had approached against the decision of Mr Devaud, NAB said: “It is likely that the offences committed by the accused would entail more severe penalty.”
Without clarifying whether the findings of Mr Devaud were quashed or not, the NAB’s official statement said the court had decided to remand the case to the attorney-general as required under Swiss law for taking it up with a larger jury.
The NAB statement said it was just another step in the Swiss legal procedure meant for the trial of money laundering case in the Canton of Geneva.
NAB said in order to delay the proceedings and to gain advantage at the initial stage of the case, the attorneys of Ms Bhutto and Mr Zardari had raised the secondary issues like notification of the decision, summons for the hearing and the validity of the indictment order served to them. The Misdemeanour Court rejected all these secondary pleas, it said.
|