The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has announced its decision to fast-track the hearing of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) supremo Nawaz Sharif’s appeal against his conviction in the Al-Azizia reference.
In a significant move, the court has opted to delve into the substantive aspects of the case, including charges, defense, and evidence, bypassing procedural and jurisdictional matters.
The IHC’s division bench, led by Chief Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, made this decision, following their recent acquittal of Nawaz Sharif in the Avenfield reference on November 29.
The Al-Azizia Steel Mills corruption reference dates back to December 24, 2018, when Nawaz Sharif was sentenced to seven years in jail, accompanied by a fine of Rs1.5 billion and US$25 million.
The case revolves around the Sharif family’s inability to justify the source of funds used to establish Al-Azizia Steel Mills and Hill Metal Establishment in Saudi Arabia.
Having been declared a proclaimed offender in December 2020, Nawaz Sharif returned to Pakistan in October this year after nearly four years in London for medical treatment. He subsequently filed applications to revive appeals against his conviction, asserting that they were dismissed during his absence.
During the hearing, PML-N lawyer Amjad Pervaiz outlined the appeal, highlighting that it challenges the December 2018 verdict in the Al-Azizia reference. Responding to a query about its connection to the Panama Papers, Pervaiz confirmed the link and argued that the three references, including Al-Azizia, Avenfield, and Flagship Investment, stemmed from a single Supreme Court judgment.
Pervaiz underscored that only two witnesses, Wajid Zia and Mehboob Alam, played a prominent role in the Al-Azizia reference, none of whom were eyewitnesses.
The lawyer contended that the charges of “assets beyond means” were based on the establishment of Al-Azizia Steel Company in Saudi Arabia in 2001 and the subsequent creation of Hill Metal Establishment in Jeddah in 2005-2006, owned by Nawaz Sharif’s son Hussain Nawaz.
In his arguments, Pervaiz stressed that Nawaz Sharif was not a public office holder from October 1999 to May 2013 and questioned the necessity of three separate references for accusations of holding assets beyond means.
Addressing the National Accountability Bureau’s (NAB) request to revisit the video scandal involving former accountability judge Arshad Malik, the court asserted that it was the petitioner’s decision.
Despite the NAB prosecutor’s suggestion to return the reference to the accountability court, the IHC rejected the proposal and opted to proceed with hearing the case on its merits.
PML-N leaders, including Azam Nazeer Tarar, urged the court to consider the appeal on its merits, citing previous injustices against Nawaz Sharif. The proceedings also touched upon financial transactions between Hussain Nawaz and Nawaz Sharif, with the defense arguing that sending money from son to father is not a crime.
The hearing was adjourned until Tuesday, December 12, with further arguments on the merits of the appeal expected at that time.
