Mohammad Jamil
Makhdoom Ali Khan, counsel for Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, resumed his arguments over Panama Papers case before the 5-memebr bench of the Supreme Court and maintained that substantial evidence was required for the disqualification of a member of the National Assembly. He said that a declaration from a court of law is required in order to proceed further with Article 62 of the Constitution, and maintained that the evidence presented by petitioners so far did not fulfill the requirements for the disqualification. During the course of arguments, Makhdoom Ali Khan referred to a judgment on a petition by a PTI leader in 2014 against the PM that termed Article 62 as both ‘ambiguous’ and a ‘nightmare’. He added: “Solid evidence is required for the disqualification of parliamentarians, while judicial declaration is vital for the disqualification of PM under Article 62 of the Constitution.
It is strange that immediately after the proceedings in the court, leaders or counsels of Sharif family and petitioners start interpreting the comments of the judges to their advantage. It is up to the court to take note of PM’s speech in the assembly, and statements of his sons and daughter. Meanwhile, BBC Urdu claimed having official documents of the Nielson and Nescol offshore companies that flats were purchased in the 1990s, and there has been no transfer of ownership ever since. An official record of companies doing business in the UK reveals that PM Nawaz Sharif’s son, Hassan Nawaz, established Flagship Investment Ltd in 2001. Documents also revealed that another flat “12-A” located in the same block of the Mayfair apartments is owned by a British company Flagship Investment Ltd, and none other than Hasan Nawaz is director of the company.
Of course, white collar crimes are difficult to prove, as the perpetrators of fraud and corrupt practices have the knack of concealing their crimes and the assets they make from loot and plunder. There are departments and institutions to investigate the culprits and put them in the dock; but since they are under the control of the government, no action can be taken against those at the helm. Efforts are being made even to dilute or revoke the articles 62 and 63, and if the PPP and the PML-N join hands, they have the numbers in the assembly to amend the clauses so that the members of the ruling elite are not prosecuted. In April 2016, the Senate Chairman Raza Rabbani had said that Article 6 of the Constitution had once again turned out to be incapable of protecting the statute itself, parliament and democracy.
Referring to the decision to allow former president Pervez Musharraf to leave the country, he called upon the federal government and the legislature to undo the provision by amending the Constitution. One has to ask him as to what should be done about other articles in the Constitution about the fundamental rights of the people vis-a-vis protection of their lives and the responsibility of the government to provide education, health facilities and job opportunities. Since the governments failed to protect the lives of the people and provide jobs, should those articles also be revoked? If the government fails to deliver, and majority of the people continue to live under subhuman conditions or below the poverty line; if members of the ruling elite continue enjoying all comforts and luxuries of life while it is difficult for the people to keep their body and soul together, the ruling elite could one day meet the wrath of the people.
