- Says it is fundamental right of people to know whether PM is eligible or not
- Tells Attorney General to ‘stick to one story’
- For us, NAB died on Tuesday, SC to AGP
ISLAMABAD, February 22: A five-member larger bench of the Supreme Court (SC) led by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa resumed hearing the Panama Leaks case on Wednesday.
Attorney General Ashtar Ausaf continued his arguments in the court on Wednesday. He said that he had taken a look at the records and concluded that the Sharif family took loan on foreign currency accounts.
To this Justice Azmat Saeed remarked that the court had been told that investments had been made with the Qatar Prince, and no foreign currency account had been mentioned. He asked the Attorney General to assist the court and not become party to the case.
The Attorney General continued that the Hudaibiya Paper Mill case should be kept separate from the Panama Paper case.
To this Justice Azmat Saeed said that if the Hudaibiya Paper Mill case was not based on facts, why was he trying to avoid it? He added that the NAB had proven to be a dead organization yesterday. He added that the court has to make an intervention if institutions are not working.
Speaking about disqualification of the Prime Minister, the Attorney General said that the law states that the disqualification reference is first sent to the speaker, and if he does not respond only then the court can intervene.
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf counsel Naeem Bukhari responded saying that the Supreme Court had sent former prime minister Yousuf Raza Gillani home even though $65 million were never returned to the public exchequer.
The hearing has been adjourned till Thursday.
The AG told the bench that the case record in the Hudaibiya reference had been examined and that the company had obtained loans through foreign currency accounts.
At this, Justice Saeed expressed the bench’s frustration by saying that the lawyers were issuing different statements each time, which was confusing the bench.
“If a story has been made up, you should stick to it,” he remarked.
Supreme Court remarked that it is a fundamental right of the nation to know whether its prime minister is eligible or not.-Agencies