Former Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif appealed against the Supreme Court’s verdict in the Panama Papers case on Tuesday. In three separate review petitions, Sharif’s lawyer, Khawaja Harris, cited 19 reasons as to why he should not be disqualified.
Former Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif appealed against the Supreme Court’s verdict in the Panama Papers case on Tuesday. In three separate review petitions, Sharif’s lawyer, Khawaja Harris, cited 19 reasons as to why he should not be disqualified, reported news agency PTI. Last month, a five-member bench of Pakistan’s apex court had disqualified Sharif for dishonesty and ordered the National Accountability Board, the country’s anti-corruption agency, to investigate him and his children in the corruption scandal, first reported by The Indian Express as part of the Panama Papers investigation.
In a 34-page application, Sharif appealed to the top court asking for an injunction to suspend its original verdict till the review petitions were decided. The petitioner also argued that Sharif did not conceal documents in his nomination papers ahead of the 2013 presidential polls — the SC had labelled Sharif dishonest due to this.
“As far as disqualification of Petitioner (Sharif) by way of declaration in terms of Section 99(f) of ROPA and Article 62 (1)(f), for non disclosure of his un-withdrawn income from Capital FZE in his nomination papers for 2013 General Elections is concerned, it is submitted that this declaration also suffers from an error apparent on the face of the record,” the petitioner argued, reported PTI.
“It is also submitted that under the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, ‘salary’ is to be declared as income only after it is received,” the petition said.
Also read: Nawaz Sharif steps down as Pak PM: Full text of Supreme Court order in Panama Papers case. Click here.
The petitioner argued that under Article 188 of the Constitution, it was against the law to disqualify Sharif without a trial. Further, it was stated that the judgment disallowed Sharif from appealing, which is the right of every citizen.
Sharif also argued that the July 28 decision should have been made by a three-member bench, excluding Justice Asif Saeed Khosa and Justice Gulzar Ahmed, as their jurisdiction had expired after their dissenting judgement on April 20. “By signing the the final order of the court (Justice Ahmed and Justice Khosa) have actually passed two judgments in the same case, which is unprecedented in judicial history,” the petition stated, according to PTI.
Sharif has been trying to replace Pakistan’s “flawed” system to end the ouster of prime ministers. He has repeatedly been quoted as saying he will replace it with a new one.