IHC discards NAB case against Zardari; chides it for deviating from law

The Islamabad High Court has discarded the NAB’s reference against former president and PPP Co-Chairman Asif Ali Zardari declaring it ultra vires while directing the bureau to make a new reference, reported 24NewsHD TV channel.

Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Amir Farooq on Tuesday heard a petition filed by Mr Zardari seeking his acquittal in the NAB’s reference against his property in America. 

While hearing the petition, CJ Minallah declared that the NAB’s reference against Mr Zardari was not according to the law. He chided the bureau that all its references got busted because they were not prepared as per the law. 

The court tasked the anti-graft watchdog to make a new reference while excluding the income tax matter from it till Jan 18. 

CJ Minallah remarked that the NAB should first send this matter to the Federal Board of Revenue before making the reference. He said that the bureau was just wasting its time by making pointless references. He stated that NAB was not above the law. 

How the bureau could declare null and void the Income Tax Order by itself, the CJ observed adding that the NAB does not have any jurisdiction to nullify the FBR Assessment Order. He directed the watchdog to send the case to the FBR as the revenue board does have the authority to look into the matter. 

Farooq Naek, the counsel for the former president, said that he had submitted the acquittal application of Zardari before his indictment. He said that the accountability court should have sent a notice to the NAB and should have sought a reply from it. 

Mr Naek further told the court that Mr Zardari submitted his acquittal application under the Second Amendment Accountability Bureau Ordinance. 

He said that Zardari bought the property and made payment in cash. On which, the CJ asked him under which clause the NAB had made reference against Zardari. 

Naek contested that the NAB could not file a reference against his client under any of its clause. 

NAB prosecutor Jehanzeb Bharwana told the court that the reference was made under Sections 2, 4 and 12. 

Naek said the NAB objected why Zardari bought a property when he was a public office holder. He said that the accountability court had rejected Zardari’s acquittal application even without hearing it. 

The NAB prosecutor said that the Supreme Court had ordered the bureau to investigate into the fake accounts matter. He stated that through a fake account, a transaction of Rs150 million was made to buy the property. The amount was paid to the property seller Mohammad Bari who confessed before a magistrate that he had received Rs150 million through cheques. 

Justice Farooq remarked that as per the Supreme Court rulings, no importance could be attached to the statements given before a magistrate. 

Mr Bharwana said that in the wealth declaration statement of Zardari, the price of the property was written Rs53 million.

On this, the CJ wondered how the NAB could involve itself in the matter of income tax declaration. Could it declare the Income Tax’s Deemed Assessment Order null and void, he further asked? 

Justice Farooq said that it was quite deplorable that in our country the official price of property differed from its original price. 

“Can NAB make a reference on it? If so, then all Pakistan is doing this,” Justice Farooq added.  

CJ Minallah asked the prosecutor had he obtained any report from the FBR? 

Mr Bharwana replied that it was a money laundering case and the wealth statement was just a proof. 

The CJ asked so it was just Rs53 million money laundering case? The prosecutor replied that it was not Rs53 million rather it was Rs150 million money laundering case. 

The CJ remarked how the NAB could transgress its authority as the bureau could not go beyond Rs53 million figure. The NAB still does have the option to send the case to the FBR or review its reference by excluding Rs53 million figure, the CJ added. 

The prosecutor agreed to the court. He told it that the FIA investigated these cases and on the Supreme Court order, the cases were shifted to the NAB. 

The court adjourned the hearing till Jan 19.

Reporter Ehtisham Kiyani