File photo. Tolga Akmen—AFP
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday acquitted Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) leader Nawaz Sharif in the Al-Azizia reference, his last remaining conviction, paving the way for him to contest the upcoming general elections due on Feb. 8, 2024.
Announcing a short order reserved earlier in the day, a two-member bench comprising IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb said Sharif was acquitted of his conviction, adding reasons for the decision would be recorded later. The same bench had acquitted Sharif in the Avenfield reference last month.
However, while the PMLN leader no longer has any pending convictions, he remains disqualified for life according to a Supreme Court ruling. The apex court, a day earlier, had taken up the inconsistency arising out of the lifetime disqualification of lawmakers and the amended Elections Act, 2017, which has fixed disqualification to five years, stating it would take up the matter in January.
The Al-Azizia Steel Mills reference pertains to a case in which Sharif was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment and fines of Rs. 1.5 billion and $25 million on Dec. 24, 2018. According to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) reference, Sharif was unable to justify the source of funds provided to set up Al-Azizia Steel Mills and Hill Metal Establishment in Saudi Arabia.
In today’s proceedings, Sharif’s lawyer Amjad Pervaiz said he wished to argue on the matter of his client’s dependents. He told the court that one of NAB’s witnesses, Wajid Zia, had admitted there was no evidence pertaining to Sharif’s dependents. Arguing that the trial court had kept civil miscellaneous applications—by Maryam Nawaz, Hassan Nawaz and Hussain Nawaz—filed in the Panama case as the basis for its verdict, he said none of them had proven Sharif was the owner of these assets.
“It is a principle that evidence in one case cannot be admissible in another. Especially when the nature of both cases is separate,” he said, adding the trial court also relied on an interview given by Hussain to a private TV channel in 2016 even though it had specified the matter did not concern Nawaz.
Maintaining an accused was innocent until proven guilty, Pervaiz said the onus was on the prosecution to prove the charges against the accused. “The accused cannot be forced to prove his innocence,” he said. “The prosecution could not present a single piece of evidence. Therefore, the burden of proof cannot be transferred onto the accused,” he added.
In his arguments, the NAB prosecutor said the references were filed in accountability courts on the directives of the Supreme Court, adding a joint investigation team (JIT) was formed to probe them. “In cases concerning assets, there are only two to three methods of investigation,” he said, adding all collected evidence was part of the record.
“Al-Azizia and Hill metal are the two prime allegations. Tell us when the Al-Azizia allegations were brought,” asked the IHC CJ. “You were the prosecutor. Tell us what evidence you possessed. Tell us on what basis you transferred the burden of proof onto the accused,” he said. “Is there any evidence on record? Is there any witness present?” he asked.
The prosecutor said Sharif was indicted on charges of corruption and corrupt practices, with witnesses from the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) and the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) presented in court. “This is a case of white collar crime,” he said, adding evidence was collected from across the country and letters were also written to collect evidence from abroad.
The IHC CJ then asked the NAB lawyer to apprise the court of the evidence it linked to the case, adding it must prove the assets in question were acquired through corrupt practices. The prosecutor said that the JIT formed by the Supreme Court had determined the assets were acquired through corrupt practices. However, the IHC CJ noted the JIT’s lead witness, Zia, said he had no evidence to prove this.
“This is all based on conjecture. A conviction cannot be handed down based on conjecture. If there is evidence then tell us,” Justice Farooq said. The court then reserved its verdict in the case before announcing it a short while later.