ISLAMABAD: Incarcerated former prime minister Nawaz Sharif’s decision to get a long adjournment of his appeal against his conviction and detained ex-president Asif Ali Zardari’s move to withdraw all of his three bail pleas came as a surprise to many.Both developments happened in a quick succession in the Islamabad High Court (IHC), which is the competent judicial forum as these cases fall in its jurisdiction.Nawaz Sharif’s appeal will now be heard after mid-September when the annual summer vacations of the IHC will end while Zardari’s bail applications relating to the Park Lane, Tosha Khana luxury vehicles and bulletproof vehicles cases will come up when and if these were filed afresh. Ex-premier’s lead lawyer Khawaja Haris himself opted for the adjournment after the summer holidays and Zardari’s attorney took back the bail requests.Former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Kamran Murtaza told The News that the ex-prime minister’s appeal will now be heard after September 15 when the summer holidays will conclude. He expressed dissatisfaction with the way Nawaz Sharif’s cases have been pursued and argued in courts and said too much hurry has been shown with the aim of securing favourable results. “Haste and mishandling marred the defence of the former premier,” Kamran Murtaza believed and said when the Supreme Court had rejected such bail request on medical grounds only a few weeks back, it should not have been filed in the IHC as it was unexpected to be accepted on the same grounds.He said Nawaz Sharif’s lawyers have not been able to convince the judges that the former prime minister’s health was too serious, deserving his exit from the jail for treatment, and that there was no grave problem that could not be addressed in the prison.The former SCBA chief said that the reason seeking adjournment till the end of the summer vacations could be that the attorneys felt that they did not want the bench that will be available during these holidays to hear the case.Kamran Murtaza disagreed with the six-week bail earlier granted by the Supreme Court to Nawaz Sharif on his request and said there should either be bail or no bail, and it can’t be limited. About Zardari’s decision to withdraw his bail pleas, the seasoned lawyer said that it was possible that the former president came to the conclusion that at present not a good case for such relief was made out. “The former president’s remark made in the court while retracting his bail applications that he did not want the judges to be in a difficult situation was in fact a gibe.”Kamran Murtaza said that he always advised his clients not to be in a hurry and let him move the bail application after the investigations have been completed. Before that, he said, such a move is considered premature. The lawyers representing the two top opposition politicians declined to talk to The News on the record about the decisions of their clients. However, sources close to their legal teams cited different reasons behind the moves.One of them said that the prevailing circumstances necessitated leaving aside the fast track strategy adopted by Nawaz Sharif’s legal team as it hasn’t produced the desired results. He was of the view that from now on a slow track might be followed and added that the overall environment was also not conducive, creating prospects for any immediate relief. Azam Nazir Tarar, one of the Sharif family’s lawyers, told The News that sensing that the bail is going to be rejected, he had withdrawn the application in the case of Hamza Shahbaz from the Lahore High Court (LHC).He said that there was a strong possibility that an appeal against the rejection of the former prime minister’s bail on medical grounds by the IHC would be filed in the Supreme Court shortly.A Zardari lawyer told this correspondent on condition of anonymity that his client could file the bail application in the IHC even after the withdrawal of the previous requests. He said that when Zardari would be sent to the prison on judicial remand, the plea would be submitted to the IHC. He said that even if the bail had been granted, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) would not have freed Zardari and would have arrested him in another case. The former president himself had told the IHC while withdrawing his bail pleas: “I know who has framed cases against me and why I am standing before this court. The prosecution fabricated false cases against me.” The NAB is investigating the Park Lane case for Zardari’s alleged involvement in extending loan and its misappropriation by Parthenon Private Limited, Park Lane Estate Private Limited and others. Another allegation pertains to getting vehicles from Tosha Khana and payment of import duty/taxes from fake bank accounts. The third case is about purchase of armoured vehicles and payment of import duties through fake bank accounts.In the Avenfield and Tallat Ishaq cases, the Supreme Court has toughened the bail criteria and bail can only be awarded in extreme hardship cases. However, the high courts have recently granted bails to accused persons facing NAB cases, including some high-profile politicians. In the IHC the accused persons facing NAB references related to Diplomatic Shuttle Service and Safa Gold Mall have been given bails after these Supreme Court judgments.
from The News International - National https://ift.tt/2RIN6Hf
0 comments:
Post a Comment