Maryam terms Justice (retd) Saqib Nisar a liar

Asserting that she was sure that ‘truth’ would one day become apparent, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) Vice President Maryam Nawaz on Wednesday claimed that the ‘affidavit’ given by the former top judge of Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) Chief Court Rana Shamim was the third instance in which somebody from judiciary had spoken in the favour of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, reported 24NewsHD TV channel.

Speaking to the media outside the Islamabad High Court (IHC), she said, “Sadly, there is the same government, same court and same group of ‘conspirators’ even today.”

Maryam said Justice (retd) Saqib Nisar was a liar because he was not defending himself at any forum. “What a common man can do in a country where even a judge does not get justice?” she remarked referring to Rana Shamim’s revelations about former chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Saqib Nisar’s role in cases against her and her father Nawaz Sharif.

Maryam further said that despite the fact that she and her father were innocent, still they regularly attended the court hearings. “But sadly, these judges do not show up in the court to answer the allegations levelled against them,” she said and hoped that the ‘truth’ spoken by the former top judge of the GB would not be treated as a contempt of court case.

It was said, PML-N vice president went on to add, that no matter whosoever was guilty in a certain case, only Nawaz Sharif would be punished for that.  

She alleged that the former CJP Saqib Nisar destroyed PKLI only to benefit his brother.

IHC adjourns hearing of Avenfield reference until Nov 24:

Earlier, the Islamabad High Court, on NAB’s request, adjourned hearing of the appeals filed by Maryam Nawaz and Nawaz Sharif against the penalties handed down to them in Avenfield reference

During the hearing, the NAB prosecutor told the court that the offshore companies owned by Maryam and Nawaz were registered in British Virgin Island.

When Justice Amir Farooq inquired as to how it could be ascertained that that particular man or a woman was the ‘beneficial owner’ of these properties, the NAB prosecutor replied there was a letter by Mossack Fonsec, a law firm, which confirmed as to who was the beneficial owner of these properties.

Justice Farooq told the prosecutor that first of all, he would have to prove the charges against the defendants instead of basing his case merely on ‘assumptions’. “What documents do you have to prove that Maryam Nawaz is the beneficial owner of these companies? Is a single letter sufficient to prove somebody guilty in this case?” the judge asked.

Reporter: Ihtesham Kiani