|
|
|
| September 23, 2005 | Friday | Sha'aban 18, 1426 |
PPP assails govt’s version of SGS case proceedings
ISLAMABAD, Sept 22: Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) spokesman Senator Farhatullah Babar said on Thursday that the government had issued a one-sided version of the proceedings of the SGS pre-shipment inspection (PSI) contract case against former prime minister Benazir Bhutto and her husband Asif Ali Zardari in Geneva.
Reacting to the official spokesman’s statement on the proceedings, he said the regime was trying to confuse people by giving a spin to the proceedings before the examining magistrate. He said the core of Ms Bhutto’s deposition before the investigation magistrate was that she rejected the military regime’s allegations that the companies or accounts of those companies belonged to her. She also dismissed the allegation that she had purchased the jewellery, he added.
The official spokesman had on Wednesday told reporters that Ms Bhutto had informed the examining magistrate that she had nothing to do with the business of her family members.
The spokesman claimed that an agent of Ms Bhutto, Jens Schlegelmilch, has confirmed that Ms Bhutto and her husband established some offshore companies and her jewellery set was purchased from the money drawn from their accounts.
However, the PPP spokesman said Ms Bhutto told the magistrate that the pre-shipment inspection contract was awarded in a transparent manner.
The contract stood on merit as was evident from the report of the auditors demonstrating the financial gains for Pakistan and its people, she had said.
“This is Ms Bhutto’s position, one she took unwaveringly since 1997 and the regime has not been able to produce any evidence to the contrary.”
Senator Babar said the government should address the issues raised by Ms Bhutto instead of confusing people by giving a one-sided version of what transpired before the investigation magistrate in Geneva.
He said it was a farce to claim that a court in Pakistan had convicted her. As the tape transcripts proved, the order had been written by the regime itself for the judge to sign.
|
|
|
|
