Setting up of ASCL: It was not found accused utilized known, declared assets: IO

A prosecution witness on Friday told Accountability Court hearing corruption cases against former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his sons that it was neither established in the investigation nor was claimed by the accused person that they have utilized the known and declared assets for establishment of Al-Azizia Steel Mills Company Limited (ASCL).
Mehboob Alam, prosecution witness and investigation officer (IO) National Accountability Bureau (NAB), while testifying before Accountability Court judge Muhammad Arshad Malik in the ASCL and Hill Metals Establishment (HME) reference said that it transpired during the investigation that accused Hussain Nawaz and Hassan Nawaz did not claim that the business, assets, interests or claims fund including US $ 6 million for ASCL and subsequent investment of GBP 5 million for HME were acquired by them from their personal savings, earnings and resources.
"It is neither established during investigation nor claimed by the accused persons that they have utilized the known and declared assets for establishment of ASCL and subsequently HME," he said.
At the start of the hearing, defense counsel Khawaja Haris filed an application seeking a one-day exemption for Sharif from appearance before the court, which the court approved.
Mehboob Alam said that the version of the accused persons was found unfounded and untrue and even otherwise all the explanations put forward by the accused persons show that the claimed funds in Dubai, Qatar and subsequently Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), the United Kingdom (UK) belong to Main Muhammad Sharif.
The witness said that the sons of the accused Nawaz Sharif claimed to be only beneficiaries of such funds, which is implausible and remains totally unsubstantiated. The accused did not join the investigation at NAB to produce any elaboration of the earlier stances and provide further evidence in their defense, he said.
Alam said that the investigation transpired that ASCL was established soon after the accused person moved to KSA in December 2000.
The defense counsel while objecting to the witness' statement said that entire statement is based on hearsay. He said that the witness is abusing the law. "We will object at every point as this is our right under the law and we are not here to facilitate the witness. Inferences, conclusions and opinions drawn by the investigation officers are not admissible," he said.
The witness said that the sale proceeds of ASCL are claimed to be primary foundation basis of sponsor funding for the establishment of HME.
On this Haris asked the court if this is the investigation of an IO, adding the witness is producing information provided in the JIT report, he said.
Alam said that at the time of establishment of ASCL, accused Hussain had no independent source of income to the extent that establishment of the project of steel mills could be justified.
"Remittances to the extent of Rs 1.1878 million were remitted to the personal account of accused Nawaz Sharif directly from HME or through account of Hussain Nawaz," he said, adding that it was revealed during the investigation that accused Nawaz Sharif acquired the assets in the name of non-earning sons who ostensibly hold and manage the same on his behalf and for his benefit.
He further told the court that it transpired in the investigation that accused Nawaz Sharif acquired the assets in aid, abetment and assistance of accused Hussain Nawaz and Hassan Nawaz which are disproportionate to their known sources of income.
Alam said that the accused Nawaz Sharif during his address to the nation and speech at the floor of the National Assembly, which were broadcast by electronic media, in the aftermath of the Panama Leaks took the stance that sources were utilized for acquisition of assets. Hussain and Hassan had already been declared proclaimed offenders by this court by an order dated November 15, 2017. Call up notice was again sent to Nawaz Sharif on February 8, 2018 for recording of his plea and production of defense.
NAB Special Prosecutor Waqas Malik after completion of statement of the IO requested the court to order his cross-examination during the next hearing.
Haris while objecting to the NAB request said that cross-examination of the IO would be conducted after recording the statement of Zia in the Flagship reference. He said, "The court had assured us that cross-examination of IO would be conducted after recording the statement of Zia in Flagship case. I will file an application in the Supreme Court if cross-examination of IO is allowed."
The court turned down the request of NAB and summoned Zia to start recording his statement in the Flagship reference on the next hearing to be held on Monday and also summoned Mehboob Alam for cross-examination of Tuesday next.