Nawaz Sharif files another appeal against disqualification verdict

ISLAMABAD (NNI): Discontented by ouster, former Prime Minister Nawaz Shairf on Saturday filed second review petition against disqualification and National Accountability Bureau’s (NAB) references in Supreme Court (SC).

On July 28, the apex court had disqualified Nawaz Sharif for not being honest for concealing his salary from a Dubai-based company and directed the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to file references against him and his children on the basis of the report of a joint investigation team that probed their off-shore properties.

Khawaja Harris, Sharif’s lawyer, filed the 48-page appeal, contending that the verdict in the Panamagate case was in violation of the Constitution and negated the facts. The court failed to take into consideration the true fact, thus, the disqualification verdict against him is liable to be overturned, he submitted.

Besides, the counsel said, his client has been deprived of his right to fair trial by appointing a monitoring judge to oversee NAB proceedings against him.

Earlier, Nawaz Sharif had filed three review petitions challenging the verdict handed down in the petitions filed by Imran Khan, Sheikh Rashid and Sirajul Haq, requesting the court to review its judgement.

His counsel contended that he had not hid his salary in his nomination papers for the 2013 polls – the ground on which he was disqualified for not being honest and trustworthy. Under Article 188 of the Constitution, Sharif cannot be disqualified without a trial, petitions further said.

A day before, the former prime minister’s children – Hussain, Hassan and Maryam Nawaz and her spouse retired Capt Muhammad Safdar had filed appeals seeking review of the verdict that directed the national anti-graft watchdog to file references against them in connection with their off-shore properties.

The applicants through their counsel filed appeals, pleading the apex court to review its judgment and stay further implementation of it until their appeals are decided. They contended that the Supreme Court could not direct NAB to file references against them and argued that the top court had become party to NAB proceedings and thus, depriving them of their right to fair trial guaranteed under the Constitution.

They submitted that the way Panama JIT carried out investigation did not conform to the principles of justice. Besides, the appointment of a SC judge to monitor NAB proceedings is in violation of the articles of the constitution that guarantee the right to fair trial under due process of law and right to life and dignity and protection.