Talking to media outside Supreme Court, PTI's central secretary information Naeem-ul-Haq maintained that the Prime Minister has violated his oath of office and the Constitution; and added that the truth behind the Panama papers should be unearthed before the nation; PTI would continue its efforts to eliminate corruption in the country even after the conclusion of the Panama papers case.
To a question, he said that it is up to the Supreme Court whether to summon the Prime Minister or not. However, he added that PTI is of the opinion that Prime Minister and his spouse should submit their statements before the court. PTI's spokesman Fawad Chaudhry said that the apex court in its observation has stated that it was not important to know the history of the apartments owned by Sharif family and the offshore companies but the important matter before the court is whether the Prime Minister was 'honest and Ameen' or not.
He said that the Prime Minister, in his speech to the National Assembly had stated that his children started their business in London in 2005 while his son, Hussain Nawaz in an interview had stated that his brother Hassan Nawaz started business in London in 1995.
According to the documents, he added that Hassan Nawaz, first purchased property in London in the year 2000 and Maryam Nawaz is owner of Minerva Ltd since 2005. He further maintained that Kalsoom Nawaz, wife of Nawaz Sharif, had acknowledged the purchase of the flats in 1996.
He further stated that Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan had also acknowledged that the Sharif family was residing in the apartments since 1996 while another PML-N leader Siddique-ul-Farooq had stated that Sharif family was residing in the apartments since 1993.
Fawad Chaudhary further said that it was now the Sharif family lawyers' responsibility to tell the court as who owned the apartments from 1993 till 2004. Talking to media, JI chief Siraj-ul-Haq who is also one of the petitioners in the case, urged the apex court to prevent the Prime Minister from using his authority till the case is concluded.
According to him, the Prime Minister's speech was full of evidence in which he admitted that his children's names were included in the Panama papers. However, he regretted that the Prime Minister's lawyer had told the apex court that the Premier's speech in the National Assembly was a "political statement". "We don't say that Prime Minister should resign but at least he should be stopped from using his authority till the case is decided", he added.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2017