- Khan’s case cannot be compared to that of Nawaz Sharif: Justice Faisal Arab
ISLAMABAD, December 15: The Supreme Court on Friday disqualified Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Secretary General Jahangir Tareen but ruled in favour of PTI Chairperson Imran Khan in its judgment on the disqualification case against the two party leaders.
The three-member bench had reserved the verdict in the disqualification petition against the
two PTI leaders on November 14. The chief justice ruled that Imran is not disqualified as a parliamentarian as the petitioner was not directly affected in the foreign funding case. Justice Faisal Arab has said that Imran Khan’s case is different and cannot be compared to that of Nawaz Sharif. The court also ruled that the ECP will impartially investigate the foreign funding claims against the PTI chief by scrutinising accounts up till five years ago The judgment states that Imran wasn’t bound to declare his offshore company, declared his London flat in an amnesty scheme and that his former wife Jemima gave Imran the funds for buying the Bani Gala estate.
However, the apex court disqualified Tareen under Article 62(1)(f) because of his blatant misstatement regarding the ownership of the Hyde House property and failure to declare it in his nomination papers. The decision was expected to be announced at 2pm today but was subjected to delay. As the judges took their seats, Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Mian Saqib Nisar apologised for the delay and explained that there was a mistake on a page, so all 250 pages of the judgment had to be read again. The apex court, in its judgment, declared that Tareen had failed to declare in his nomination papers the Hyde House property or SVL, the off-shore company established for the property. The apex court verdict said that Tareen was infact “the actual, true, real and beneficial owner of the said property”. “SVL or Hyde House was never transferred to any trust by the respondent, thus, it is his asset which he has failed to declare in his nomination papers filed on 9.9.2015 according to the mandate of the law to contest the by-elections from NA-154 Lodhran and, therefore, he is not honest in terms of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution read with Section 99(1)(f) of ROPA,” read the Supreme Court’s order. Article 62(1)(f) reads: “A person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) unless-…he is sagacious, righteous and non-profligate, honest and ameen, there being no declaration to the contrary by a court of law.” The apex court added that Tareen had made “a blatant misstatement…before the highest judicial forum of the country”, claiming he had “no beneficial interest in the trust arrangement which holds the SVL and the Hyde House” while he was infact a ‘discretionary lifetime beneficiary’ along with his spouse.
