A few weeks ago, the examining magistrate had also indicted Jens Schlegelmilch on the same charges, according to a National Accountability Bureau's press release.
In the indictment case Mrs Benazir Bhutto denied charges saying, she has never been summoned by the examining magistrate. She also claimed that she had not been informed officially of the indictment.
The stance of Mrs Benazir Bhutto and Asif Zardari in their appeal was that settlement between Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the SGS implied that Pakistan had waved all claims of PSI contract signed in 1994.
Following is the text of indictment on charges of money laundering and appeal filed by Mrs Benazir Bhutto and Asif Ali Zardari.
In the first hearing, the examining magistrate of the Canton of Geneva in the presence of the Attorney General pronounced an additional indictment of Mrs Benazir Bhutto, aggravating the earlier indictment of November 15, 1998.
The additional charges held against Benazir Bhutto are:
-- to have committed money laundering by profession, realising a number of profits;
-- to have collected, while she was Prime Minister of Pakistan between May 1995 and September 1997, approximately $ 8.2 million on account of Bomer Finance of which she and Asif Ali Zardari are beneficial owners;
-- to have allowed, without ignoring and by fully accepting without reserve, while she was Prime Minister of Pakistan, between May 1995 and September 1997, that approximately $ 3.8 million be collected on the account of Nassam Overseas with Barclays Bank; the beneficial owner of Nassam Overseas being her brother-in-law Nasir Hussain;
-- to have allowed, without ignoring and by fully accepting without reserve, while she was Prime Minister of Pakistan, that approximately $ 1.8 million and approximately CHF 700,000 be collected by Jens Schlegelmilch.
Mrs Benazir Bhutto, however, chose to deny the charges. She pretended to have never been summoned in view of an earlier hearing by the examining magistrate.
She further claimed that she had not been officially informed of the first indictment (which was based on simple money laundering).
She denied having committed any money laundering nor illicit practices. She furthermore declared that the Government of Pakistan was misusing the Geneva criminal proceeding for political purposes.
On the basis of the settlement agreement concluded between the Government of Pakistan and SGS, putting an end to two arbitration proceedings, Mrs Benazir Bhutto claimed that the State of Pakistan should no longer be admitted to the Geneva criminal proceeding as a damaged party.
The stance of Mrs Benazir Bhutto and Asif Ali Zardari was that the performance of the settlement agreement between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and SGS implied that the State of Pakistan had waived all claims deriving from the 1994 PSI contracts.
On this basis, Mrs Benazir Bhutto and Asif Ali Zardari pretended that the State of Pakistan no longer suffers a loss in that context.
On June 30, 2004 the examining magistrate turned down the request, the main grounds for doing so were:
a. That, indeed, the agreement concluded between the SGS and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan puts an end to a civil litigation opposing these two entities, and only them;
b. That neither Mrs Benazir Bhutto nor Asif Ali Zardari nor Jens Schlegelmilch are part to this agreement, and nor is Cotecna;
c. That it does not appear that the three indicted have undertaken steps in order to give back to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan the kick-backs they are accused to have unduly received from the SGS and from Cotecna and which were agreed and for which the financing was made by the public Pakistani funds.
The kick-backs have thus been embezzled to their personal profit. The order said.
Mrs Benazir Bhutto and Asif Ali Zardari (who was represented by his attorney) have announced that they would challenge this decision.