ALTHOUGH some sort of verdict has been announced in the Panama case, we have still to wait for many more days to see a clear-cut decision in this regard.

Now, as per the decision of the court, a joint investigation team (JIT) comprising representatives of a number of federal institutions, will be formed to question the prime minister and his family. The JIT was to be constituted within seven days and the process for this has already been set into motion. The JIT will have 60 days to complete its assigned task. A special bench of the apex court is also in place to ensure implementation of the Supreme Court verdict and closely monitor working of the JIT.

So, everyone has to wait for some more time to see what the JIT investigation says — in favour or against the prime minister and his family members. However, it is rather surprising and incomprehensible as to why the opposition parties, their leaders and lawyers’ bodies are raising a hue and cry against the JIT, though it forms part of the apex court’s verdict.

The apex court ruling nowhere had ordered that the prime minister should resign prior to appearing before the JIT. As has been reported in details in newspapers, the Supreme Court has only directed the prime minister to appear before the JIT, whenever called.

There is no harm in waiting for some more time and avoiding rejecting the JIT formation and demanding resignation of the prime minister. Let the law take its own course.

Asim Munir

Rawalpindi

(2)

THE split judgement in the Panama case is a clarion call for Nawaz Sharif and his sons as they now have to get ready for further investigation into the corruption allegations. It is a clear message for him that his character is no more impeccable.

The judgement has not absolved him of the allegations of financial irregularities. Instead, he has been asked to appear before a joint investigation team (JIT) comprising members from ISI, MI, FIA, SECP and SBP to probe into the charges of money laundering. The dissenting notes written by the two judges say the prime minister has no moral authority to hold the office under Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution for being dishonest and untruthful.

After the Supreme Court judgement, the chief executive of the country should step down pending inquiry against him. It will not only help investigators conduct an impartial inquiry, it will also strengthen the democratic system.

In case the prime minister is reluctant to step down the political parties must come forward and exert pressure on him to leave office and produce himself for accountability.

Guldar Khan Wazir

Loralai

(3)

MANY people have been criticising the judiciary on social media for not delivering a sound and conclusive decision against the Sharif family in the Panama case. Everyone has become an expert on law. Most of these opinions are based on hearsay.

Instead, the public should read the decision itself which is available over the Internet and then form an opinion. On the other hand, political parties have also been quick in taking decisions to their own advantage without thinking of the wider consequences this judgement has for the country.

It is needless to say that though the prime minister has survived another battle, it has left him with scars. The legitimacy his rule has been compromised and whether the prime minister can ever regain the faltering public trust is yet to be seen.

Sabina Saif

Lahore

Published in Dawn, April 25th, 2017