Re: Pakistani PM charged with contempt
May be they are innocent.. let them face they law and get themselves acquitted following the due course of law. Why they have to hide behind immunity and NRO. If the prosecution did not act lawfully in the past does not automatically imply they they are innocent. The same Nawaz Sharif pet judge acting as Attorney General for the Musharraf regime wrote an unlawful letter to the Swiss authorities to withdraw the cases against Zardari for which he was already convicted withdrawing all the evidence.
http://thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=12426&Cat=13
Key letters in Swiss cases reveal hidden facts
ISLAMABAD: The crown jewels in the heaps of files and documents in the Swiss cases - the May 22, 2008 Malik Qayyum letter to the Swiss Attorney General, which has become a noose around the government and the December 9, 2009 NAB chairman’s letter given to the Supreme Court - have now become available to The News. The letters reveal that the Supreme Court has been misled and misinformed by government lawyers as the contents of the letters raise many questions, which have not been answered by either Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan or any other government lawyer.
The December 9 key document, signed by the NAB Prosecutor General Accountability, Dr Danishwar Malik, who collected the 12 secret boxes of evidence in Geneva in the presence of Pakistan High Commissioner in London Wajid Shamsul Hasan, duly recorded by a Geo TV camera, reveals even more startling facts which have not been mentioned or have been ignored by the lawyers arguing for the government in the Supreme Court.
Both these documents firmly establish: 1. That the Swiss Attorney General ordered on 22-12-2003 to reopen investigations and to proceed with additional indictment; 2. That a Swiss Judge sent the case for further trial to Court of Appeal on 29-10-2007; 3. That the Swiss court of appeals confirmed the order of the Swiss Judge on 19-3-2008; 4. The Swiss Judge ordered closing the cases on 09-4-2008 and 5. The Attorney General of Pakistan wrote on 22-5-2008 withdrawing the cases.
It may be recalled that during the hearing of the NRO case in December 2009, the Supreme Court had ordered NAB to furnish all the record pertaining to all overseas corruption cases including the Swiss money laundering cases, which were closed because of the NRO deal.
This big file had the key covering letter dated 14-12-2009 and signed by Dr Danishwar Malik, narrating all the events regarding corruption and money laundering cases in Switzerland. This covering letter, though written by NAB controlled by the law ministry, used some misleading words but even then the facts were very clear and showed how the court of investigation magistrate, on October 29, 2007, declared the evidence available as sufficient for a trial. It also showed that the Swiss court of appeals had rejected the appeals of President Zardari against his conviction on March 19, 2008. But mysteriously this covering letter did not mention the first visit of Malik Qayyum to Geneva in the first week of April 2008, immediately after which the process of closure of all corruption cases was initiated. This hidden fact was revealed in the letter Malik Qayyum wrote later to the Swiss Attorney General on May 22, 2008. It clearly shows Malik Qayyum’s first visit to Geneva and refers to a meeting on April 7, 2008 in its very first line. After this first visit in which all the evidence submitted by the state of Pakistan were taken back/withdrawn, the court closed the investigations.
Later, Malik Qayyum wrote a letter on May 22, 2008 for the formal withdrawal request of mutual legal assistance and surrendering status of state of Pakistan as ‘civil party’ and claimant on the plundered money. Subsequently, all the cases were dropped on August 25, 2008. The two letters simply contradict Aitzaz Ahsan’s argument that cases were closed not only because of the letter of Malik Qayyum but were closed on merit because of lack of evidence.
Just a few weeks before the closure of the cases on April 9, 2008, the same court has not only announced conviction of the accused but the Swiss court of appeals has upheld the conviction. Later, when Pakistan withdrew the evidence, the Swiss authorities rightfully closed the cases, as there was no evidence and no claimant party.
Legal experts say if the SC forces the Attorney General to write a letter to the Swiss authorities, the situation will go back to April 7, 2008 and proceedings could start from where they were left.
It is important to mention here that conviction in money laundering case in Switzerland was announced on October 29, 2007, only 24 days “after” the promulgation of the notorious NRO, and the conviction by the Swiss court of appeals on March 19, 2008 took place only 6 days before Prime Minister Gilani took oath of his office.
While this is the factual documented position of the cases and how and why they were dropped by the Swiss authorities, the only other argument of Aitzaz Ahsan that Prime Minister Gilani has in fact acted on the advice of the then law secretary Justice (R) Aqil Mirza and former Attorney General Anwar Mansoor Khan, has already been rejected by the eight-member bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. Both these persons have contradicted having submitted any such advice as Aitzaz has claimed in his arguments. Justice (R) Aqil dissociated himself from the advice on the day it was submitted in the apex court under his name and resigned and Anwar Mansoor Khan, who also resigned, has recently said in an interview that Aitzaz Ahsan has misquoted him.