Annual cash flow, retained earnings: JIT did not pose any question to Hussain Nawaz: prosecution witness

The joint investigation team (JIT) that probed Panama Papers case had not asked any question from accused Hussain Nawaz, son of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, with respect to annual cash flow, retained earnings and audited financial statements of Hill Metals Establishment (HEM).
Key prosecution witness and head of JIT, Wajid Zia said this while testifying before the Accountability Court Judge Muhammad Arshad Malik during hearing of Al-Aziza Steel Mills and HME reference during cross-examination by the defence counsel Khawaja Haris.
Haris asked Zia if JIT had asked any question from Hussain regarding annual cash flow, retained earnings and audited financial statement of the HME. Zia replied that JIT had not asked this question from Hussain on May 30, 2017 when he appeared before it. He also said that as per statements of Hussain recorded by JIT on May 30, 2017, June 1, 2017, June 3, 2017, June 9, 2017 and July 4, 2017, the JIT had not put any question to the accused Husssain with respect to the annual cash flows, retained earnings or audited financial statement of HME. The JIT did not ask him to produce documents relating to annual cash flow or retained earnings or audited financial statement of HME from the years 2010 to 2015.
The former premier was present in the courtroom during hearing where he was shifted from Adiala Jail amid tight security arrangements. During the break, Sharif had a launch in a room adjacent to the courtroom along with senior party leaders including Javed Hashmi, Chaudhry Tanveer, Mushahidullah Khan and Irfan Siddiqui. Later he was allowed to go and the security officials shifted him back to Adiala Jail.
The court granted one day exemption to Sharif from personal appearance before the court on Thursday (today).
While testifying, Zia said that he could not point out any portion of the statement of Hussain Nawaz recorded on May 30, 2017 where the JIT had asked him any question recording cash flow, retained earnings and financial statements of HME for 2010-2015. He said that he also c could not point out any portion of the statement of Hussain Nawaz recorded on May 30, where the JIT had asked him any question recording corporate business or banking record of HME for any period from 2010-2015.
Zia said that JIT had collected some source documents during the course of investigation related to HME, which are available at different pages of volume-VI of JIT report. He also said that it is correct that at page four in para-B of volume-VI, he had provided the list of source documents obtained during investigation. The list also mentioned the Al-Dar Bureau report, he said.
Zia further said that he has already stated that Al-Dar Bureau report had been mentioned in the list by mistake. When Haris asked Zia if the JIT members had pointed out this mistake, he replied apparently the JIT members did not point out this mistake. It is correct that the JIT report deals with the statements of accused Hussain and not with the documents produced by him, he said.
To another question Zia said that there is no document in the JIT report produced by Hussain or on his behalf to show that Hussain had produced Al-Dar Bureau report before the JIT.
The witness further said it is correct that Hussain appeared before the JIT on five different occasions. Hussain appeared before JIT on May 30, 2017, June 1, 2017, June 3, 2017, June 9, 2017 and July 4, 2017.
The witness said that no portion of documents showed that Al-Dar Bureau report was produced by Hussain. "Other than para-B, section 10 of Volume-VI of JIT report, nowhere is mentioned in the JIT report from which source it acquired these source documents," he said.
He said that it came to the notice of the JIT that Al-Dar Bureau report had been filed before the apex court. The witness said that Al-Dar Bureau report was discussed by JIT during the first few weeks.
When he was asked if the JIT members had gone through Al-Dar Bureau report, he said, "I cannot be certain about it but I do believe that JIT members might have gone through Al-Dar Bureau report." He said that JIT did not ask question from Hussain about Al-Dar Bureau report when he was appeared before it on May 30, 2017.
When Hussain Nawaz appeared before the JIT on May 30, 2017, the JIT did not put him to notice that according to JIT, the information given in the Al-Dar Bureau report was irrelevant to determine sufficiency of funds which HME for purpose of remittances sent to accused Nawaz Sharif. Zia said the JIT had asked for relevant record which he did not produce.
At the start of the hearing, National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Deputy Prosecutor General Sardar Muzaffar Abbasi while replying to the objection of the defence counsel regarding alteration in the statement of Zia, said that the narrative presented by the defence in form of objection is misleading, misconceived, concocted and cannot be admitted as legal assumption under any law.
He said that exactly the same story was narrated in the writ petition filed by the defense regarding the matter in the Islamabad High Court (IHC), which has been fully denied and confronted by the prosecution by filing a written reply along with counter affidavit before the IHC.
Abbasi said that all contentions and objections of defence are specially being incorrect against the record and order dated August 30, 2018 of this court. It is specifically denied that any change was made in the deposition of the witness Wajid Zia in line No. II, page IV, of the deposition, he said.
He said that in fact a direct question was put by the defence to the witness which was very clearly and directly replied by the witness and was recorded by this court exactly in the form and manner in which the witness deposed; therefore neither any deletion or addition was made in the deposition nor any change was made during the course of cross-examination of Zia. However, a correction was made which brought the answer in the form/manner in which the question was asked by the defence, he said.
No objection was ever raised by the defence at the time of recording of Zia's statement. The defence counsel left the courtroom and after some time an application was filed before this court for adjournment in the said case.
The question asked by defence was whether accused Hussain Nawaz produced Al-Dar Bureau report before the JIT during the course of investigation. The witness clearly replied, "Al-Dar Bureau report was produced by Hussain before the JIT during the course of investigation," he said, adding that by raising factually twisted contents, the defence turned the proceedings into a media trial to cause delay in the smooth functioning of the court proceedings and frustrate the direction of the apex court for conclusion of trial within six weeks.
The court adjourned hearing till Thursday (today) and Haris will continue cross-examination of Zia.