Alert Sign Dear reader, online ads enable us to deliver the journalism you value. Please support us by taking a moment to turn off Adblock on Dawn.com.

Alert Sign Dear reader, please upgrade to the latest version of IE to have a better reading experience

.

Panamagate hearing: Maryam Nawaz submits reply in court

Updated Jan 18, 2017 07:47am

Email


Your Name:


Recipient Email:


The Prime Minister's daughter Maryam Nawaz Sharif submitted her reply to the court through her lawyer on Tuesday as the Panamagate case hearing continued.

Maryam Nawaz in her reply maintained that she was not her father's dependent after her marriage in 1992 to Captain Safdar, and that she lived with her husband after her wedding.

She also submitted her tax details for the past five years. In 2012, she had filed Rs2,314,917 as income tax, Rs6,517,504 in 2013, Rs8,872,742 in 2014, Rs9,340,243 in 2015 and Rs12,128,778 in 2016.

Maryam Nawaz's reply stated that five homes comprise the Raiwind Estate which she said belongs to her paternal grandmother. Around 45.5 acres of 48 acres are under her grandmother's supervision, the reply said.

All the houses in the Raiwind Estate belong to my paternal grandmother, she said.

The costs on Shamim Agricultural Farm are jointly paid, the reply said, of which Maryam Nawaz paid Rs6,000,000 in 2014 and 2015.

Makhdoom Ali Khan continues his arguments

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's counsel Makhdoom Ali Khan continued his arguments in court.

He maintained that Article 248 provides the prime minister office's immunity but does not provide blanket cover to the PM as an individual.

Makhdoom Ali Khan made it clear that he was just using Article 248 as a reference and not to plead for immunity for the premier.

The PM's counsel explained that the president, prime minister and governors of Pakistan have constitutional immunity except while discussing judges' conduct within the Parliament.

He added that if judges' conduct is discussed in the assembly, then immunity would not be extended to members of the Parliament as Article 68 and 204 prevent members from speaking on judges' conduct.

He also explained that if Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was to speak somewhere other than the Parliament then he would ask for immunity under Article 248.

Makhdoom Ali Khan mentioned during his arguments that Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto also asked for immunity in the Chaudhary Zahur Ilahi case.

On this Justice Khosa remarked that Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto had not made a speech in the NA in the Zahur Ilahi case, which is why giving the example of that case does not apply here.

The PM's counsel further argued that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's speech on the National Assembly's floor can not be used as evidence.

On this point, Justice Asif Saeed Khosa remarked that there are instances of the court examining Parliamentary proceedings in the past.

Makhdoom Ali Khan replied saying that there are also instances where the court did not accept speeches as part of the evidence in the past.

During Monday's hearing, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s counsel told the Supreme Court that his client’s speech on the floor of the National Assembly was protected by the Constitution.

“Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif maintains that he never misstated, deceived or misrepresented in his May 16, 2016, overview [of his] family business on the floor of the National Assembly,” senior counsel Makhdoom Ali Khan argued before a five-judge Supreme Court bench that is hearing the Panamagate case.

Whether the apex court could look at all the speeches made in parliament had to be examined in view of the provisions of Article 66, which protected freedom of speech in the house, the counsel emphasised.

In case this privilege was violated, then every member of parliament would hesitate before saying anything in the house, the counsel feared, adding that it would then have a chilling effect, freezing free speech and obstructing parliamentary business.

Article 66 of the Constitution deals with the privileges of members and provides complete freedom of speech in parliament and no member can be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him in the house.

Email


Your Name:


Recipient Email:




Comments (81) Closed



REALISTIC Jan 17, 2017 12:32pm

another twist to the story here comes the grand mother.... wait for more to come.

Parvez Jan 17, 2017 12:30pm

Lets hope the S.C gets to the bottom of this....because the people have completely lost faith in our leaders.

Speak Jan 17, 2017 12:39pm

Yet another lie. Now NS is seeking constitutional immunity. This proves he has no money trail to prove & what ever he told in parliament was a shear lie. He never imagined that this will goto SC. They thought issue will die with time as Khawaja Asif said. Now we should hope & pray that SC makes the correct decision in light of all this evidences & lies.

annnal singh Jan 17, 2017 12:45pm

good

Pakistani1 Jan 17, 2017 12:52pm

Entire family is blessed with skills to tell stories.

maverik Jan 17, 2017 12:52pm

The family is going to rat out each other. Money has a lot of power.

iffi Jan 17, 2017 12:52pm

evidence really ???

Ali shah Jan 17, 2017 01:02pm

What results may come out from Panama Case, the business of the state will be as usual. Nothing extraordinary will happen.Public will not get any benefit and results may be start political sloganeering, with the loss of one part and win of another party.

Mohammed Jan 17, 2017 01:03pm

More fairy tails from the Sharifs. What next, a letter from a Qatari prince, oh wait a minute.....

Shah, Canada Jan 17, 2017 01:03pm

There is no limit to falsehood...

Masoud Jan 17, 2017 12:59pm

"Maryam Nawaz in her reply maintained that she was not her father's dependent after her marriage in 1992". Maryam is on record having candidly said live on media that she is dependent on her father and that she do not have any property anywhere in or outside Pakistan. Further she is on record having said that she lives with her father. i personally think the Sharif family has nothing worthy of presenting in SC as a proof of their honesty. It's all over.

Ali shah Jan 17, 2017 01:05pm

To everyone's naivety,the public, as far as Panama Case is concerned, will continue to drink from the same pond that they have been drinking since decades.

Philosopher(from japan) Jan 17, 2017 01:09pm

Wild goose chase. They can even prove that moon was her grand grand mother's property. Who is going to check how she accumulated a big land??

Catalyst Jan 17, 2017 01:07pm

"The PM's counsel further argued that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's speech on the National Assembly's floor can not be used as evidence." Are you kidding me?

khanm Jan 17, 2017 01:27pm

What a mambo jam-boo ...People say the truth or lie or keep silent for the same reasons: when they're afraid of the consequences, when they'll be affected, and when they don't care cos they are above norm of any society.. laws are not meant for them..

Bilal Jan 17, 2017 01:39pm

Good lawyer, this man.

Muhammad younus Jan 17, 2017 01:40pm

Let us hope & pray wrong must be punished, who are responsible for raising of poverty & suicide incidents....

Salman Tarik Kureshi Jan 17, 2017 01:41pm

@Catalyst Speeches made by members in Parliament have perfect immunity in every constitutional democracy in the world. There is no exception. It is regarded as a necessary protection for parliamentarians to enable them to speak up without fear on the issues concerning you and me, the voting citizens. Oh, by the way, you do vote, don't you?

Atam Vetta Jan 17, 2017 01:47pm

In the UK, India & other democracies a speech made by an MP in the respective Parliament has immunity.

haider shaikh Jan 17, 2017 01:51pm

Freedom of speech doesn't mean that you should lie to the nation in the parliament.

Khaled Jan 17, 2017 01:49pm

@Salman Tarik Kureshi. Agreed, but that doesn't mean that you give misstatements on the floor of the house.

Shahzad Ikhlaq Jan 17, 2017 02:01pm

But she said in one of her Interview's in 2012 that she doesn't have any income of her own and still lives with her father, what to believe & what not to

Shahzad Ikhlaq Jan 17, 2017 02:06pm

But she said in one of her Interview's in 2012 that she doesn't have any income of her own and still lives with her father, what to believe & what not to.

Khan Jan 17, 2017 02:23pm

Now Grandmother has arrived in the fairy tail story:)LOL

Sam Jan 17, 2017 02:26pm

Joke of the century not dependent of Nawaz sharif

Sid Jan 17, 2017 02:46pm

The PM counsel is waisting court time by bringing up past cases to convince the judges that the PM should have immunity.

PM should be a role model for all citizens and by claiming he has immunity he has admitted guilt and therefore is no longer fit for office..

He should just resign now

Ahmad p Jan 17, 2017 02:56pm

But but...maryam said she never owned any property outside or inside Pakistan.

Amer Jan 17, 2017 03:09pm

Let the courts decide, lets not jump to conclusion because IK wants us to believe something. We are not push overs and would like the courts to decide instead of a few anchors or IK or PTI. Pakistan can only be run successfully by civilians, period! We will not be brain washed again that civilians are good for nothing no matter how much the establishments disinformation cell tries.

Noor Jan 17, 2017 03:12pm

@Atam Vetta ّ This was not a statement. It was declaration about his assets.

Objective View Jan 17, 2017 03:28pm

@Amer With due respect. Pakistani awam are push-overs. As Hitler said: "What good luck for leaders that men don't think"

If we not not pushovers we would have these currupt politicians and people in uniform serve us not rule over us!

Viking Star Jan 17, 2017 03:27pm

@Amer .... is your full name Amer Sharif??? Just inquisitive. IK/PTI are civilians for your kind info. The Sharif's only are required to prove a "legal" money trail - to Qatar/Saudi Arabia and London, its as simple as that! If the cant, obviously they are unable to, means they used the money, laundered it overseas - which was illegal (Period).

Viking Star Jan 17, 2017 03:33pm

@Salman Tarik Kureshi ... do they have immunity to speak without fear bunch of lies? And speaking about "sanctity" of Parliament at same time? Come on, nobody is buying that argument.

Peace Jan 17, 2017 03:37pm

@REALISTIC we all inherit properties and money from our parents and grandparents. Learn to respect someone's family at least.

Hammad Jan 17, 2017 03:36pm

PM lawyer is making some serious statements and with good references.

NAEEM Jan 17, 2017 03:46pm

PM has immunity to continue massive corruption

Shahid Jan 17, 2017 03:53pm

It is always better to read the article(s) with clause(s) cited to cross check reality behind any claim by any counsel b/c usually it is a 'shot gun' approach, especially in cases such as this. Reality is complete immunity is enjoyed only by the President and Governors.

Amer Jan 17, 2017 03:53pm

@Viking Star Yet another example of people being judgemental.... even if my name was Amer Sherif does that matter :) We need to learn to be fair and rise above party politics/personal liking disliking.

Khalid Sheikh Jan 17, 2017 03:54pm

The family who is caught red handed is busy day and night to find fake evidences and try twisting the case in order to get relief on technical grounds but the whole nation'so eyes are on the Supreme Court which has promised to go into the bottom of this case to find a truth and the TRUTH knows the whole nation. Simply the family should prove the money trail (in minute detail) of this looted wealth and they can walk free from the court.

Yaser Arafat Jan 17, 2017 03:54pm

This is fact PM counsel argument are more logical and relevant than PTI or Sheikh Rashid. We generally comments comments based on perception or somehow biased and this is one of PTI success. But the facts and figures what are provided to court rather media talk. The PTI started media campaign and bellowed that NS is guilty because he has offshore companies but at the end in court they plead that PM does not qualify for article 62,63 because in difference in speeches at different times, a 180 degree U turn.

Might PTI winning to build perception in public to some extent but certainly they knows or at least have idea about court decision which not in their favor. In both case PTI will have advantages. If they win than obvious otherwise system is corrupt.

Umar Jan 17, 2017 03:57pm

Does Pakistan politics has any credibility left thanks to the Sharif family..The quotations are being engraved in to history what a shame for Pakistan

BAXAR Jan 17, 2017 04:21pm

@Salman Tarik Kureshi "Speeches made by members in Parliament have perfect immunity in every constitutional democracy in the world". Does that cover the past and family affairs of members in Parliament? The speech in question was about the past and family business, not state affairs. If the immunity covers that, it will be called omnipotence. A member takes oath that covers "to be truthful". If found lying, membership is revoked, and so the immunity. To invoke the immunity clause, one should keep quiet.

Latif khan Jan 17, 2017 04:29pm

Justice delayed is justice denied...

Majid Khan Jan 17, 2017 04:36pm

@Atam Vetta Thank you brother. The PTI leader always refers to western democracy. May be someone will pass this message to the concerned leader.

ASHRAF IBRAHIM Jan 17, 2017 04:44pm

One should remember that this is not the case of Immunity of PM. Its all about Panama Papers and PM's family offshore wealth.

Muhammed Ali UK Jan 17, 2017 05:06pm

What reply....she and her brothers were under age, yet said they owned and bought property worth billions, this case is being dragged out,

sak Jan 17, 2017 05:41pm

This time it is grandmother from father side, next story will be grandmother from mother side it will never end.

Iftikhar Husain Jan 17, 2017 05:50pm

Slowly the truth will come out for the SC to form an opinion about the massive money taken out of the country.I am surprised that people hide their unearned wealth from the people of Pakistan.

Farooqsohail Jan 17, 2017 05:54pm

Pakistan main focus should be on CPEC to complete it as soon as possible and PANAMA is nothing but Hangama only

yousaf Jan 17, 2017 06:04pm

What the hell is this. She said by herself in a television interview in 2012 that I have no property neither in London nor in pak and I am living with her father and now claimed opposite in courts. NS want immunity same like zardari claimed from court.

haider shaikh Jan 17, 2017 06:04pm

@Yaser Arafat This case is not between PTI vs. Nawaz Sharif. But this case is between PM and Pakistani Awam.

PATRIOT Jan 17, 2017 06:15pm

I don't believe a word they say ....... they have lost all their credentials.

Usman Jan 17, 2017 06:12pm

"In case this privilege was violated, then every member of parliament would hesitate before saying anything (FALSE) in the house, the counsel feared, adding that it would then have a chilling effect, freezing free (FALSE) speech and obstructing parliamentary business."

Just add the word FALSE and that is exactly the purpose of this court trial and that is exactly what the people of Pakistan would like to see!!!!

kasamalli Jan 17, 2017 06:15pm

Our comments in this newspaper or statements uttered outside the SC by both the parties or even commentary by so many so called experts in electronic media are meaningless. SC is a constitutional court and not a trial court.Their decision/ verdict will purely based on constitutional clauses and fully conforming to the law. However, many of us are not likely to accept the final verdict, for we already have made up our minds one way or the other. Just see that the judges have been giving sufficient time to both the parties. long lectures, verbosity and rhetoric hardly pays. What is important for the court is proper case laws and previous verdicts of higher courts and proper authentic documents. All the five judges are independent,highly respectable and most senior ones. We must whole heartedly accept whatever decision they give instead of attributing any wrong motives on them.

NoNy Jan 17, 2017 06:16pm

more important disclosures will be the tax returns of Mryam Nawaz and her husband from 1990s onward. the properties and transactions under questions do not belong to any year(s) between 2012 to 2016.

kasamalli Jan 17, 2017 06:21pm

@haider shaikh: if you believe in Pakistani Awam, why not wait until 2018 general election.

NeutraView Jan 17, 2017 06:18pm

Pakistanis deserve these leaders since they are the ones who love them so much, that they keep re-electing them back in office again and again.

Maaz Pasha Jan 17, 2017 06:27pm

@Amer Really ?? do u know what are u talking about ??..Maryam said in 2012 she was dependent on her dad Nawaz Sharif ...How could she say now that she was independent since 1992 ?? Two different statement by same person Maryam Safdar ..

kamran bazmi Jan 17, 2017 06:44pm

Lies have no end....keep speaking...inshaAllah truth will prevail...

Kamal Jan 17, 2017 06:45pm

Makhdoom Ali Khan has argued that Artcle 66 of the constitution provides complete freedom of speech in parliament and no member can be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything he said or any vote given in the house. Article 66 does not say that freedom of speech covers all lies, misstatements, misguidance and perjury.

Ahsan gul Jan 17, 2017 07:06pm

The best course of action and face saving for Nawaz and family is to admit amount transferred overseas and accept their misdeed. That way public will respect them for telling the truth. Sincerely

Alla Bux Jan 17, 2017 08:28pm

Look at the income taxes she paid. In the US, I pay ten times that much in taxes but can not even afford a business class ticket (unless paid by the company) more than once a year to visit Pakistan. She flies, forget about lowly business class, in a private jet ALL the time.

Hanif Jan 17, 2017 08:29pm

It's surprising Maryam Nawaz paid so much in taxes during last 4 years , must be some sort of conspiracy

ADNAN MAZHER khan Jan 17, 2017 09:03pm

I have full faith in polticians of my country. They do not leave any trace while looting and making illegal money.

Ali Jan 17, 2017 09:27pm

Maryam Nawaz said earlier she was dependent on her father, now she says she was not dependent on her father? Which is correct? Every member of Nawaz Sharif family has given contradictory statements?

They have made mockery of the justice system for last nine months. The Supreme Court should order polygraph (lie detector) test for all of them, so the truth can be established. No prime minister or his family can be above the law.

Shafiq Shah Jan 17, 2017 09:52pm

You have freedom of speech but you do not have freedom to LIE in the Parliament.

concerned Jan 17, 2017 09:50pm

So if she was independent in 90's when the flats were purchased she must have filed tax return, present that in court. Or if that is not the case then someone must have claimed her as dependent in 90's with all the assets that belong to her which is highly unlikely as the purpose of creating these companies is to hide to assets purchased from un-taxed or illegal monies.

asadlateef Jan 17, 2017 10:02pm

@Speak stupid.you are jumping ahead in concluion.lets hear the lawyers of maryam and hussian reply in the court.

taha Jan 17, 2017 10:29pm

wow i like this immunity for parliament idea. Lie as much as you want and you are protected.

Peace Jan 17, 2017 10:31pm

Most of the people commenting here do not live in Pakistan and neither vote. PML-N will get majority again in 2018 as the most people who votes neither know or care about Panama. Even if Nawaz is censured by courts and had to resign then his daughter, son, brother, son-in-law or other family member will become PM but all strings will be in the hand of Nawaz.

Zulfeqaar Canada. Jan 18, 2017 01:48am

Story teller.

alla bux Jan 18, 2017 02:21am

She appears to be a very poor girl. I am sure her cooks, maids, drivers, gardeners and guards are ALL very poor. Please leave the POOR girl alone.

Imran Jan 18, 2017 02:19am

I thought that back in 2011 on a talk show she said that she has no property anywhere and lives with her father. These people have no shame. Pathetic.

imran qasim Jan 18, 2017 04:01am

Immunity doesn't allow to lie on a charge. Immunity allows you to represent people of Pakistan n their unspeakable issues.

parveez Jan 18, 2017 05:09am

Once a upon a time. There was this country called Pakistan, which had no king or queen. But there were people who came to power and acted like kings and queen. They lied, cheated and robbed the country, but the public loved them and there was law for them . What a beautiful country, lets hope and pray that there is no other country like ours.

taha Jan 18, 2017 05:33am

no worries Zardari came to rescue PM and himself. Deed was done.

Saif Jan 18, 2017 06:31am

@Masoud : "Maryam is on record having candidly said live on media that she is dependent on her father and that she do not have any property anywhere in or outside Pakistan. Further she is on record having said that she lives with her father." She did say this herself and we all heard that. I wish one of the Supreme Court Judges would have reminded her that.

MindShare Jan 18, 2017 07:28am

Article66 allows freedom of expression but not freedom to tell bunch of lies on floor.

I don't know why didn't respected judges responded to this nonsense argument from a lier.

sULTAN WALI KHAN Jan 18, 2017 07:33pm

@MindShare Imran Khan is the pioneer A/C holder of the Offshore Company and also admitted that he committed this crime just to save income tax. Why this aspect is not discussed in the honorable Supreme Court

syed Jan 18, 2017 07:46pm

PM and his family has lost all moral grounds. They should better quit the politics once for all.

rahim Jan 18, 2017 09:34pm

who is not telling stories in Pakistan once they have reached the level of the likes of Nawaz. I do not know a rich man in this country that does not aim for a foreign nationality and does not own a house in USA , London and Dubai. They meat their swiss and Singapore Bankers on monthly basis to transfer their Pakistan earned income some where abroad never mention it in their Tax and live like Kings and that includes Imran Khan and all his cronies in his Partie . So what are we trying to prove or change by just prosecuting one family. They should all stand trial and bring their money back that they earned by not paying the workers their fair shared Salary and health benefits. All the rich people in Pakistan have blood on their hands.

taha Jan 19, 2017 07:39am

Mercy is to those who committed sins and admitted. There will be no mercy to those who knew they sinned and try hide it.