The Islamabad High Court (IHC) will hear former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's appeal against Accountability Court verdict in Al-Azizia reference and the National Accountability Bureau's plea against his (Nawaz) acquittal in the Flagship reference from September 18. A Division Bench of IHC comprising Justice Amir Farooq and Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani would conduct the hearing of both the appeals.
The acting Chief Justice IHC on Friday wrote to the Law Ministry to withdraw the services of Judge Arshad Malik at Accountability Court, Islamabad, in the backdrop of "leaked video" wherein he apparently appears confessing before a PML-N sympathiser that he was "pressurised and blackmailed" to convict former prime minister Nawaz Sharif in Al-Azizia reference. Minister of Law and Justice Farogh Naseem in a press conference on the same day said they have stopped Arshad Malik from performing his function as judge, till further order.
The IHC Registrar has made Arshad Malik's letter and affidavit, which he sent to acting CJ IHC, part of Nawaz Sharif's appeal in Al-Azizia Mills case. The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on June 27 deferred hearing of appeals as Nawaz Sharif's counsel Khawaja Haris sought adjournment for completion of paper books of the trial, therefore the court deferred the matter until second week of September.
In December 2018, Judge Arshad Malik convicted Nawaz Sharif in Al-Azizia reference and acquitted him in the Flagship reference. The former premier was sentenced to seven-year rigorous imprisonment and also disqualified from public office for a period of 10 years. The ex-PM in his appeal contended that he was convicted under section 10 of NAO, 1999 read with schedule thereto and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a term of seven years along with a fine of Rs 1.5 billion and US $25 million.
Sharif submitted that from a bare perusal of the said judgement, it is evident that the findings recorded therein and forming basis for the conviction of the petitioner under section 9(a)(v) of NAO, 1999 read with section 10 ibid, are based on no evidence.
He argued that he was convicted and sentenced on the basis of inadmissible evidence, unproven documents and statements of proxy witnesses which are not permissible in the eye of law.
The petitioner maintained that it is apparent on the face of the record that prima facie, the conviction and sentence recorded against the petitioner is illegal and unwarranted by law and consequently his incarceration in jail pursuant to his impugned conviction is tantamount to being held in custody without lawful authority.
While referring the legal lacunas in the judgement of AC, Sharif requested the court in his appeal to acquit him of all the charges framed against him in National Accountability Bureau (NAB) reference No 19 of 2017.
In his petition, Nawaz maintained that the decision was based on assumptions and false interpretation of law while the evidences were misperceived and the accountability court announced the verdict without hearing objections by the accused. Therefore, he maintained that the said judgement, conviction and sentence are even otherwise illegal, without jurisdiction, unwarranted by law, based on inadmissible evidence and unproven documents and on misconception and misinterpretation of law and liable to be set aside as such.
Comments
Comments are closed.