Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader and former prime minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif’s son-in-law, Captain (r) Muhammad Safdar, has approached the police seeking the registration of a case against some 100 people, including Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan, for “attempting to assassinate” his wife and party vice president, Maryam Nawaz.
As per the details, Safdar has submitted at the Chuhang Police Station in Lahore an application seeking the registration of a first information report (FIR) against the premier, his aide on accountability and interior, Mirza Shahzad Akbar; National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Chairman Justice (r) Javed Iqbal among others.
In the petition, Safdar, who was accompanying Maryam for her NAB appearance, claimed that attempts were made to assassinate Maryam at the behest of the accused.
“Sensing the seriousness of the situation, I drove away [from the NAB office] to save the life of my wife,” he said.
The petition comes after PML-N supporters and police on Tuesday engaged in violent clashes outside the anti-graft watchdog’s Lahore office, where Maryam had been summoned to respond in a case of alleged illegal transfer of government land.
While police and the Punjab government claimed that it was a deliberate attempt on the PML-N leader’s part to create anarchy, Maryam accused NAB and police of attacking the party’s workers and pelting stones at her bulletproof car.
According to the police, a case against PML-N leaders, including Maryam and Safdar, and as may as 188 workers has been registered at the Chuhang Police Station on NAB’s application.
MARYAM ATTACKED WITH LASER GUN’:
While PML-N spokesperson Marriyum Aurangzeb has said if the police fail to book the accused, the party will move the Lahore High Court (LHC), claims regarding the attempt on Maryam’s life have been added to with party stalwart Rana Sanaullah saying that “a laser gun was used”.
Speaking to a private media outlet, he said the “hidden agenda behind the clash seemed to be an attempt on Maryam’s life”.
“How can pelting of stones inflict such damage on a bullet-proof vehicle? I think a laser gun was used from some nearby building,” he said.
THE CASE AGAINST MARYAM:
According to Geo, NAB has accused Maryam of receiving 200 acres of what was supposed to be government land in Raiwind. Reports claim that the transfer was made during former Lahore deputy commissioner (DC) Noorul Amin Mengal and former Lahore Development Authority (LDA) director general (DG) Ahad Cheema’s tenure.
NAB had also summoned Mengal along with the LDA officials of that time with records.
A tract of land, stretching over 3,568 kanals, was bought by the Sharif family in 2013. The largest part of the property, 1,936 kanals, was transferred to the name of Nawaz and Shehbaz Sharif’s mother, Shamim Bibi. The land that was transferred to Maryam from that tract was 1,440 kanals.
Maryam’s appearance on Tuesday was postponed after NAB told her to return, keeping in view the law and order situation.
Supreme Court’s (SC) Justice Qazi Faez Isa, who is facing a presidential reference for not disclosing his family’s assets, on Tuesday put the federal government in a tight spot before a full bench of the apex court by pointing out key leaders of the ruling party who also owned properties in the United Kingdom (UK), including Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan and his special assistant on accountability, Shahzad Akbar.
As a 10-judge full court, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, continued hearing the petitions against the reference, Justice Isa in a written statement informed the bench that PM Imran owned six properties, Akbar (five), Special Assistant to the PM on Overseas Pakistanis Zulfiqar Bukhari (seven) and Special Assistant to Prime Minister (SAPM) on Youth Affairs Usman Dar have three to his name.
Former federal information minister Firdous Ashiq Awan and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) stalwart Jahangir Tareen each owned a property there as well. In addition, the judge submitted before the court that former military ruler Gen (r) Pervez Musharraf owned two properties in the UK.
Justice Isa submitted the statement in response to SAPM Akbar telling the court that he did not receive any salary or benefit as the head of the Asset Recovery Unit (ARU).
“Taking a cue from what is stated to have transpired in the case of the petitioner’s family, the search engine 192.com was used to search a few known public figures,” the statement read.
The judge clarified that he was “not saying or suggesting, let alone allege” that the people he had identified had illegally acquired any property in the UK in violation of the income tax, the foreign exchange and/or money laundering laws.
“Before an allegation of non-compliance with income tax law is made, the Federal Board of Revenue must check its records [of these individuals] and consider how much taxable income was declared and income-tax paid and whether they had non-taxable income, such as from agricultural land, which the Constitution exempts from payment of income tax.”
Justice Isa further stated that before making an allegation with regard to the illegal transfer of money abroad, the State Bank “must check to determine whether the said individuals had foreign exchange accounts and whether through these accounts money was remitted abroad, to exclude the possibility of it sent to the UK through Hawala, Hundi or by any other illegal means”.
Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan’s aide on accountability Shahzad Akbar has unveiled a comprehensive action plan outlined by the government to take to task the “sugar daddies” identified by the sugar inquiry commission as well as for an overall overhauling of the regulatory framework which had all the while “been in cahoots with the sugar mills”, Geo reported.
“Imran Khan was given a mandate for accountability in 2018. His 22-year political struggle has been for the same. For accountability of the powerful and influential. This was a big test for that mandate,” said Akbar, during a press conference in Islamabad alongside Information Minister Shibli Faraz.
Referring to the all parties conference called by the PPP in Punjab, Akbar went on to say, “This is not an all parties conference, it is an all sugar daddies conference.”
Akbar said that no matter how powerful a person is, no matter the party they belong to, or however wealthy, “no exceptions can be made” for anyone, and this was the line of inquiry followed by the probe commission.
“Transparency is of utmost importance when it comes to accountability. Before we take action over whatever matter is being pursued, it must be put before the people. That is why the report was made public,” said the premier’s aide.
He said the public, farmers, as well as industrial experts had been consulted over an “action matrix” that was developed.
Akbar said that the PM had approved three sets of actions during a meeting in Bani Gala earlier in the day, which he then proceeded to delineate.
These actions form the first set of actions approved by the premier and consist of the punishments to be given as well as the recovery mechanism to be enacted.
Within the broad category, seven major actions, including investigation of subsidy scandal, investigation of income and sales tax fraud, evasion and benami transactions, investigation of cartelisation, inquiry and investigation of export proceeds, loan defaults, write-offs and sale of pledged stocks, investigation of corporate fraud, investigation of potentially fake exports to Afghanistan and money laundering, and breach of provincial laws, were recommended.
Federal Minister for Law and Justice Dr Farogh Naseem resigned on Monday to represent the government in the Supreme Court (SC) in the presidential reference against Justice Qazi Faez Isa.
This is the second time that Naseem, a Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan (MQM-P) stalwart, has resigned from his post. Previously, he had resigned in November last year to represent Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa before the apex court in the case pertaining to the extension in his tenure as the army chief.
Confirming the news of his resignation, Naseem said, “I will ensure that the respect and dignity of judges is maintained. I have no personal agenda. I have the greatest respect for the Bar.”
Last year in September, Justice Isa filed a fresh application requesting the SC to form a full-court bench comprising all eligible judges to hear his petition against the presidential reference filed over non-disclosure of assets in his wealth statement.
Justice Isa had requested that the case be heard by a full court bench comprising all eligible judges of this court since the matter pertained to reference against an SC judge and as per precedent of this court in the case of ex-chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Iftikhar Chaudhry versus president of Pakistan, PLD 2010 Supreme Court.
Justice Isa had said matters narrated in accompanying civil miscellaneous application dated August 26 – “which may for the sake of brevity be read as a part hereof” – demonstrates the necessity for hearing by such full court bench.
“The petition also raises a number of important constitutional questions, including that of the independence of the judiciary, formation of an independent opinion by the president, obtaining federal cabinet’s approval and other vital issues of surveillance, and the manner and method of collecting evidence against a judge of the Supreme Court and his family,” he had said in his application.
On Friday, Justice Isa questioned the eligibility of Special Assistant to Prime Minister (SAPM) on Accountability Shahzad Akbar’s appointment as the head of the Asset Recovery Unit (ARU) and for public office.
A 10-member judge bench, led by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, will resume hearing the case on June 2, which was earlier scheduled to be taken up on March 30. The apex court had postponed the hearing due to the coronavirus pandemic.
On the last hearing on February 24, the federal government had sought a three weeks’ adjournment in the case.
Special Assistant to the Prime Minister (SAPM) on Accountability Shahzad Akbar has been accused of getting removed at least two top-tier civil servants, including Rawalpindi Deputy Commissioner (DC) Saifullah Dogar, in a bid “to assist his brother grab land” in Mandra town ofthe district’s Gujjar Khan tehsil.
According to sources, the tussle began when British-Pakistani Jawad Sohrab Malik, who is the nephew of Federal Minister for Privatisation Muhammad Mian Soomro, accused Murad Akbar, the brother of PM Imran Khan’s aide, of attempting to illegally occupy his land in the town near the Grand Trunk (GT) Road.
They said Malik’s late grandfather had purchased over 10 kanals of land in the town back in 1986 and built on it a flour mill a year later, which still stands there. “A watchman was also hired to look after the said piece of land as its succession to the heirs has not yet been made and it is still in the name of Malik’s deceased grandfather.”
‘MURAD AKBAR WANTS TO GRAB LAND’:
Sources close to the lawmaker’s nephew told The Current that his supervisor on January 14 called Malik to inform him that six or seven people had arrived at the site claiming they had purchased two kanals of it. “Malik told him [the watchman] to approach the police and file a complaint against the intruders’ attempt to forcibly take possession of his land,” sources said, adding that the unidentified persons fled as soon as they saw police reaching the scene.
A report quoted Malik as saying that three days after the incident, nearly 50 people sent by Murad arrived at the venue with bricks and other construction material. Once again the supervisor called him to inform what was going on. “A senior police officer and assistant commissioner of Gujjar Khan also arrived at the site uninvited to ensure these people take the possession of the land,” he said.
Malik said a case was filed by Murad in a civil court in 2015, claiming the ownership of two kanals of land, and got a favourable decision ex-parte in 2018. “The deceased grandfather was made the respondent and notices were deliberately sent to wrong addresses so that the one-sided proceedings are held.”
He further said he was scared that by using government machinery, Murad would take possession of the land by force, leaving him in the lurch. “To avoid this, I got stay orders from a civil court and the ADCR.”
Sources claimed that as the tussle continued, Additional District Collector Revenue (ADCR) Rizwan Qadeer also reported that Murad’s ownership was forged and the transfer of land was fake, allegedly upsetting Imran’s aide Shahzad. The report was approved by the DC, following which the Rawalpindi police chief was ordered to use force to ensure transfer of the two kanals of land to Murad.
“The cop, however, refused to intervene saying that it was a civil matter and police couldn’t interfere,” sources said, adding that in the meantime, DC Dogar was reprimanded by powerful circles and transferred along with the ADCR in what was “ironic misuse of authority” by the premier’s aide on accountability.
OTHER SIDE OF STORY:
A friend of Shahzad Akbar, who presented the SAPM’s version but clarified he “wasn’t his spokesperson”, told The Current that the cabinet member had been stopped to issue any statement over the episode by the premier himself.
He asserted that succession of the land had not been carried out because of the disputes within the Malik family, and shared documents and footage to support his claims.
According to documents provided by Akbar’s friend, Murad had bought 17 marlas of land in Moaza Bucha of Gujjar Khan’s Khasra # 473 on main GT Road in April 2005. He later also purchased another 23 marlas of land from the same khasra on June 9, 2008, the documents claimed.
In 2009, he gave an application to the revenue office of Gujjar Khan for partition and possession of his land, he claimed. “After 10 years of hectic litigation, in April 2018 the Gujjar Khan revenue office finalised the partition suit and divided Khasra # 473 into two, making Murad exclusive owner of Khasra 473/1 measuring 40 Marlas,” as per the documents.
After giving him possession, the revenue office also sectioned partition mutation number 2849 dated May 31, 2018 declaring exclusive and legal owner and possessor of Khasra number 473/1. Murad got demarcated the dimensions of his land on Jan 13, 2020 before starting construction and consigned demarcation report in Tehsil Office, Gujjar Khan, they claimed.
The source claimed Malik visited the Gujjar Khan Revenue Office on January 13-16 escorted by police officials deputed for squad duty of Soomro.
On January 17, when labourers were working on Murad’s alleged land to construct boundary wall, the minister’s official escort number GAE 538 with uniformed police officials reached the spot.
A private Vigo UC-1-ICT, allegedly registered in the name of Malik, with armed guards reached the scene and threatened labourers of consequences and asked them to stop the work.
Murad claimed that Somroo called Mandra station house officer (SHO) and ordered him to intervene. The Gujjar Khan Revenue Department after examining the documents of both sides decided that Murad, being “legal owner”, is within his right to build the wall.
Somroo and Shahzad Akbar have reportedly spoken to each other about the dispute, but wide differences exist as both fully support the claims of their relatives and are unwilling to budge from their respective stands. Both the leaders were contacted for a comment, however, they were unavailable.
Malik, however, denied the claims made by the aide of Akbar, saying his family was the rightful owner of the property. He also claimed that he was not present at the scene when the incident took place.
OFFICERS BEAR THE BRUNT:
Meanwhile, an official notification, a copy of which is available with The Current, showed that two civil servants who have been removed from office include Rawalpindi DC Saifullah Khan Dogar and ADCR Rizwan Qadeer.
Sources said the two officials, who were also allegedly reprimanded by Shahzad, were let go due to alleged misuse of authority owing to the high-level power struggle between the two top members of the federal cabinet.
Saifullah was transferred on January 20 and replaced with Capt (r) Muhammad Anwar-ul-Haq, while Rizwan Qadeer was transferred two days earlier. An assistant superintendent of police (ASP) in Gujjar Khan has also been transferred reportedly due to the dispute.
Shahzad Akbar’s friend, however, says that the removal was merely a co-incidence. He also hinted at another case pertaining to a Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) senator, being the reason behind the transfer of the Rawalpindi DC.
None of the said officers were available for a comment.
