Qatari letter in SC 'unravels' mystery of Park Lane deal

KHUDAYAR MOHLA

ISLAMABAD: Producing a letter from Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani of Qatar’s former prime minister and foreign minister before the Supreme Court in the Panama Leaks case on Wednesday, the counsel for Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s children said that his clients purchased Mayfair flats in London from the proceeds of real estate business with Al Thani.

Appearing before a five-member larger bench led by the Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali, Akram Sheikh, the counsel for Maryam Nawaz, Hussain Nawaz and Hassan Nawaz, sought permission of the bench to produce a letter of Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani for the court exclusively.

Chief Justice Jamali observed that nothing would remain secret because once a document is filed, it becomes a public document which other parties of the case could also examine.

However, after a few minutes of arguments, Akram Sheikh handed over the letter to the bench, contents of which generated many questions as one of the members of the bench, Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, termed the letter “mere hearsay evidence.”

In his letter, Hamad bin Jassim contended that his father had longstanding business relations with Mian Muhammad Sharif, which were coordinated through his eldest brother whereas both the families also enjoyed good personal relationship.

“I was informed that during the year 1980, Mian Muhammad Sharif expressed his desire to invest a certain amount of money in real estate business of the Al Thani family in Qatar. I understood at that time that an aggregate sum of around 12 million Dirhams was contributed by Mian Muhammad Sharif, originating from the sale of business in Dubai, UAE,” Hamad bin Jassim wrote in the letter.

Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa asked Akram Sheikh: “Have you read this document very closely which could be filed as a documentary evidence? It is only hearsay. Do you understand implications of this money? Would it be possible for the royal family member to appear before this court as a witness? Once the letter is brought on record, it would be a public document.”

Akram Sheikh said he is not in a position to say anything about the appearance of Hamad bin Jassim before the apex court to record evidence.

Issuing directives to the court’s associate to retain a photocopy of the letter after attesting the original one, the chief justice said that authentication of the letter would be decided later.

Prince of Qatar Hammad bin Jassim further said in his letter that properties Flat # 17, Flat # 17a, Flat # 16a at Avenfield House, Park Lane, London, were registered in the ownership of two offshore companies, adding that bearer share certificates of which were kept during that time in Qatar. The Prince said in his letter that the properties were purchased from the proceeds of the real estate business and registered in the name of two offshore companies, saying the documents of which were retained in Qatar.

He stated that Mian Muhammad Sharif had expressly said in his will that the beneficiary of his investment and returns in the real estate business would be his grandson Hussain Nawaz Sharif.

Hammad bin Jassim’s letter disclosed that after settling the accounts between Hussain Nawaz and the Al Thani family during the year 2006, certificates of the Mayfair flats were handed over to Hussain Nawaz and its record is available in Doha.

During the course of proceedings, a member of the bench, Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh, observed while commenting over Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s recently filed additional documents in the matter that such documents have no relevancy of facts.

Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh while addressing the PTI’s counsel Hamid Khan said, “The documents also include newspaper clippings. The petitioner has himself buried the truth. Why are they wasting the court’s time with tales from the Arabian Nights? Can we announce a death sentence over a newspaper story which says Allah Ditta killed Allah Rakha?”

Responding to Tariq Asad, one of the petitioners, Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali said that Supreme Court is no investigation agency, adding that under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution, a case which is adjudicated by the apex court will not have appellate forum, so if someone has committed corruption, the lower courts can take care of it.

Expressing displeasure over 686 additional documents submitted by the PTI, the bench said the court is interested in focusing on Mayfair flats in the issue.

Sheikh Rashid, the head of Awami Muslim League, requested the court to hear the matter in the court instead of forming a commission to investigate the case whereas Jamaat-e-Islami’s counsel Asad Manzoor Butt urged the bench to form a commission.

Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali said the court intends to examine all evidence after which the option of formation of a commission would be considered; otherwise it would be an option to hear the case for three days and judgement in Panama Leaks case would be announced but here the situation is totally different and a plethora of additional documents has been filed which could not be examined in minutes.

Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali said it would be impossible to decide this matter on the basis of these documents even in two decades.

The court ordered both the parties to the case to exchange all the documentary evidence with each other during the course of the day.

The counsel for Maraym Nawaz, Hussain Nawaz and Hassan Nawaz also submitted supplementary concise statements on behalf of his clients including incorporation certificates of Nielsen Enterprises Limited and Nescoll Limited.

Accepting the plea of PTI’s counsel Hamid Khan, the bench granted two days to both the parties to the case for examination of documents and adjourned the hearing of the case till Nov 17 [tomorrow].