ISLAMABAD, Jul 15 (APP): Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N)
has fully rejected the report of joint investigation team (JIT) on
Panama case and would exercise all legal options to challenge it
in the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
Addressing a joint press conference here on Saturday, Minister for Capital Administration and Development Division, Dr Tariq Fazal Chaudhry and
senior leader PML-N Daniyal Aziz termed JIT report as inconclusive
and without having any solid evidence on any allegation.
Dr Tariq Fazal said that the JIT report left many questions
unanswered as it lacked verification of many facts. He added that
the JIT had only mandate to having investigation on ownership of
However, he added the report lacked essential evidence as it
could not even prove that Mayfair flats were owned by the Sharif
family even before 2006.
He said that JIT remained busy in collecting evidences to
damage the image of Sharif family which was against its mandate. He
said that despite hectic efforts, the JIT failed to prove
accusations of money laundering, concealment of wealth or tax
evasion on the Prime Minister.
He added not a single evidence was attached with the report to
show PM’s involvement in any such matter during his 35 years
political career. “This is ample proof that the Prime Minister Nawaz
Sharif and Chief Minister Punjab Shahbaz Sharif never ever misused
their powers rather they saved billion rupees in many development
He said that all the exercise was done to tarnish the image of
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his family and nothing. He said
that Nawaz Sharif was enjoying overwhelm support of the nation.
He said that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif governed the country
in a transparent manner. As prime minister he had completed several
projects while the JIT could not find any corruption proof in these
Daniyal Aziz while quoting some portions of the report said
a thorough analysis of the report had proved that the JIT team
itself was not clear about its findings and many legal doubts could
be found in the report.
He asked the leaders of Pakistan Peoples Party and Jamat-e-
Islami to discuss this report with legal experts first and than give
opinion on it as there were many doubts and confusions on JIT’s
Interestingly, the JIT in its report had tried to link the
possession of London apartment with the prime minister just because
he usually stayed in that apartment whenever he visited London.
He added, the JIT claimed that as per the statement of Hussain
Nawaz Sharif, Nawaz Sharif stayed in this apartment while he was
sick in nineties, and this exclusive use of the apartment makes him the
sole beneficiary of the apartment as far as possession is concerned,
Daniyal Aziz said quoting the report.
He questioned how the possession of the apartment could be
linked with the prime minister just on the basis of his stay.
Quoting another portion of the report, Daniyal Aziz said
a word “Most likely” was used by the JIT on page 73 of the report
with title “conclusive findings” with regard to beneficial ownership
of Mayfair apartments.
“This shows that the JIT had no solid documents to prove ownership
of apartments and it just tried to involve the prime minister without
having facts,” he added.
Presenting another example of JIT’s ambiguity on allegations,
Daniyal Aziz quoted a paragraph of JIT report which says, “Having
gone through financial details of companies/ bank accounts and
declarations FBR record, it seems that Respondent No 1 is in
possession of assets beyond known sources of income”.
He said it was very unfortunate that the joint
investigation team (JIT) was still continuing its activities at Federal
He said according to the last order of the court a complete
investigation report had been submitted by the JIT. He questioned
why the JIT had still continued its work even after the submission of
He said it was a matter of great concern that the JIT was
still working which clearly showed its intention from its wording as
mentioned in the report as quoted, “Efforts to pursue the matter
further are however underway.”
He said the JIT also stated in its report that their work
was still “ongoing”. He questioned what JIT wanted to show and that
was it not against justice.