Submitting a 12-volume report after its 60 days investigations, the six-member JIT that probed the Sharifs' business dealings abroad told the apex court, "In the detailed analysis significant disparity amongst the known and declared sources of income and the wealth accumulated by Mian Nawaz Sharif, Hassan Nawaz, Hussain Nawaz and Maryam Nawaz have been observed. The financial structure and health of companies in Pakistan having linkage to the respondents also do not substantiate their wealth."
Appearing before a three-member bench led by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan and comprising Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh and Justice Ijazul Ahsan, the JIT head, Wajid Zia, submitted that five witnesses didn't appear before the JIT. They included Qatari Prince Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jaber Al-Thani, Sheikh Saeed (a US national and close associate of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif) required for Hudabiya Papers Mills case and Hill Metals Establishment money transactions), Mossa Ghani (a nephew of the wife of Federal Finance Minister Muhammad Ishaq Dar) in relation to his purportedly involvement in fraudulent and fictitious money transactions associated with Hudabiya Papers Mills case and his role in Malik Abdul Ghani Trust, Kashif Masood Qazi (principle witness in Hudabiya Papers Mills case), and Shezi Neckvi (plaintiff in Al-Towfeeq).
The JIT apprised the court that it has placed the names of Javed Kiyani and Saeed Ahmed on Exit Control List (ECL) and requested the bench to retain their names on the list till a final decision of the court in the matter.
In its report, the JIT said that during the course of investigation, it acquired documentary evidence about confirmation of the beneficial ownership of Maryam Nawaz of BVI companies - Nielsen Enterprises Limited and Nescoll Limited - by the Financial Investigation Agency British Virgin Islands, confirmation of chairmanship of Mian Nawaz Sharif in offshore company namely FZE Capital, UAE by Jebel Ali Free Zone Authority (JAFZA), confirmation of "fictitious" sale/purchase agreements submitted with the Supreme Court by the respondents by the Ministry of Justice, the UAE, and submission of "falsified/tampered" declarations of trusts by the respondents in the Supreme Court and before the JIT as per report of forensic expert, the UK.
Giving its findings while submitting responses of the Sharif family to five questions about Gulf Steel Mills - how Gulf Steel Mills came into being, what led to its sale, what happened to its liabilities, where its sale proceeds ended up and how they reached Jeddah, Qatar and the UK - the JIT said, "Overall the inconsistencies in the statements of Sharif family with reference to Gulf Steel Mills and the documents obtained from foreign jurisdiction by the JIT through mutual legal assistance conclusively prove that the story of respondents about Gulf Steel Mills is unauthentic, lacks substance and seems fabricated. The available and produced documents/ record, circumstantial evidence and discrepancies/inconsistencies of Tariq Shafi and respondents also establish that the sale proceeds of Gulf Steel Mills never reached Jeddah, Qatar or the UK."
Giving its finding over three questions - whether Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's sons Hussain Nawaz and Hassan Nawaz in view of their tender ages had the means in the early nineties to possess and purchase the Mayfair properties in London, how bearer shares crystallized into the properties and who, in fact, is the real and beneficial owner of M/s Nielson Enterprises Limited and M/s Nescoll Limited - the JIT submitted, "The 'true' owners of the Mayfair apartment in London at the time of the Al-Towfeek litigation in early 1999 were members of the Sharif family, which included most likely the respondent No. 1 (Mian Nawaz Sharif) who seems to be employing his children and the two BVI entities to conceal his true ultimate beneficial ownership in the Mayfair apartments."
The JIT also said, "The obvious and very strong inference, therefore, is that the beneficial owners of the Mayfair properties were not the Al-Thani family." The JIT said in its findings that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's sons Hussain Nawaz and Hassan Nawaz didn't have any independent source of income/business till 2000 and were dependent on their parents. It added, "Their residence/possession of Avenfield properties without payment of rent ostensibly was owning to ownership of the Sharif family at that time, it was only after 2001 that they claimed to have stared independent businesses (Azizia Steel Mills and Flagship Investment) respectively."
Responding to the apex court's query how bearer shares crystallized into the Mayfair properties in London, the JIT said that the claim of the respondents was found totally false, saying the fabrication of evidence to create trust deed of 2006 and the authentication by BVI authorities of FIA documents showing Maryam Safdar as beneficial owner of the companies make it clear that the issue of bearer certificates crystallizing into flats is no more relevant.
It added that London flats were not the properties of the Qatari prince and handing over of the bearer shares as settlement of Qatari investment is totally a myth. The JIT report said that Hussain Nawaz Sharif who claims to be the ultimate beneficial owner of M/s Nielson Enterprises and M/s Nescoll Limited didn't produce any document proving his ownership of the said companies/properties despite repeated demand by the JIT.
However, in the light of the authentication/verification letters of Errol George (Director FIA, British Virgin Island) and Advocate General of BVI, it can be conclusively stated that Maryam Safdar was (and probably still is) the real and ultimate beneficial owner of the Avenfield properties, through the ownership of M/s Nielson Enterprises Limited and M/s Nescoll Limited (BVI companies) and the claim of Maryam Safdar being the "trustee" was an attempt to mislead the honorable Supreme Court by presenting falsified evidence."
Responding to the Supreme Court's question whether appearance of the Qatari prince letter is a myth or a reality, the JIT submitted that Thani despite the best efforts of the JIT chose to delay his responses or sideline the issue of recording of statement by refusing to give statement, accepting and asking for a date and then raising the legal issues of jurisdiction of Pakistani courts and finally sending his response at the last moment without acceding to the jurisdiction of Pakistani law and courts.
The report said that in its investigation the JIT has collected sufficient evidence and concluded that the appearance or non-appearance of Thani is not as significant. "It has been proved through the acquired authentic documentary evidence and inconsistencies in the statements of witnesses that Tariq Shafi never handed over AED 12 million to the father of Hamad Al-Thani. Hence, there is no question of any investment in Qatari business and proceeds thereto," stated the report.
The JIT said in its conclusive findings over the Qatari letter, "The appearance of the two letters from Mr. Al-Thani in the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan is totally a "myth" and not a reality." Filing its response over how Hill Metals Establishment (HME) came into existence, where from its working capital came, where the huge sums running into millions were gifted by Hussain Nawaz to his father Mian Nawaz Sharif drop in from, the JIT said Hussain Nawaz sent a total amount of Rs 1,165 million to his father Mian Nawaz Sharif as gifts and remittances from 2010 till May 2017.
"Out of this amount Rs 822.725 million were gifted by respondent No. 1 (Mian Nawaz Sharif) to respondent No. 6 (Maryam Nawaz) during the same period. Apparently, respondent No. 6 used the gifts received to acquire land. The declared land holding of respondent No. 6 increased from zero rupees in 2010 to Rs 804.424 million in 2016 as per her tax returns filed with FBR. During 2008-2009, an amount of Rs 69.228 million was directly remitted by HME to Maryam Nawaz," the report submitted.
It added that no consideration record was available about Rs 45 million which were transferred from the account of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz to the account of Mian Nawaz Sharif on June 10, 2013. The JIT said that Hussain Nawaz failed to produce any evidence or means establishing his personal capacity of meeting SAR 90.4 million equity requirements as his share in the sale proceeds of Al Azizia Steel Company fell well short of this requirement.
"Despite repeated requests, respondent No. 7 (Hussain Nawaz) didn't produce the relevant corporate record so it is not possible to ascertain the legal status of HME whether it's a sole proprietorship, partnership or a company limited by shares," stated the JIT report.
The JIT report also said that in the absence of audited financial statements since establishment of HME in 2006 to date, it is not possible to quantify and place a monetary value on; owner's equity injection, actual status of borrowings from Saudi Industrial Development Fund, borrowing from friends and business associates, borrowings from National Commercial Bank, Saudi Arabia, and operating results after HME went into commercial operations. "Hussain Nawaz was found not to be forthcoming with truthful disclosure as to the sources and actual utilization of the funds and could not therefore establish the lawful means for his ownership of HME," stated the report.
Giving its response to the apex court's query where the money for Flagship Investment Limited and other companies set up/taken over by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's son Hassan Nawaz came from, and how the working capital for such companies came from, the JIT said that despite numerous opportunities Hassan Nawaz failed to provide any documentary evidence to justify how, when and for what amount these properties were bought and subsequently sold.
"The network of companies being established and dissolved over time appears to have been designed to camouflage the activities of Hassan Nawaz and his companies as well as to create a smoke screen in the way of discovering unaccounted wealth, the purchase of properties in the UK and amassing of wealth and properties," stated the JIT report.
While giving report about NAB and FIA cases, the JIT provided a list of a number of cases in addition to a case pertaining to the Sharif family that entered into an agreement with a trust in the USA for provision of security to banks in Pakistan on behalf of these companies so that companies could get loans against this security. "This case seems to have strong connection with Hudabiya Paper Mills case, hence NAB may be directed that either a separate case be initiated or this matter may be merged with the Hudabiya Paper Mills case, if reopened," stated the JIT report.
The JIT said that security of the record received from SECP showed that the investigation relating to Chaudhry Sugar Mills was closed by officers of the SECP in connivance with one another and with mala fide intentions, hence it recommends re-opening of the case. About Hudabiya Papers Mills case investigation, the JIT said that since its inception in 1991 and culminating in 1998 various fictitious and fraudulent foreign currency accounts were opened and loans were secured with deposits therein used for the benefit of business concerns namely; Hudabiya Papers, Hudabiya Engineering, Chaudhry Sugar, Hamza Board Mills owned by the respondents and their close family members.
It added that finally the unwinding of intricate loan structure, set up by Ishaq Dar, was completed in 1998 whereby the entire remaining proceeds amounting to Rs 712 million approximately ended up in the two companies namely Hudabiya Paper Mills (Rs 642 million) and Hudabiya Engineering (Rs 70 million) as advance against share subscription. "It is evident that the real beneficiaries of these funds were the equity holders in Hudabiya Papers Mills Limited. It is further noted that nexus of Mian Nawaz Sharif, Maryam Nawaz and Hussain Nawaz is established by the fact that they are cited as accused while Ishaq Dar is cited as an approver in the NAB final reference No. 5 of 2000," stated the JIT report.
The JIT underscored the need for reopening the HPML case on the basis of new additional evidence procured and brought on record by the JIT in the matter including filing of reference against the accused already identified in the reference. The JIT requested the Supreme Court to include the name of Saeed Ahmad in the list of accused persons in the HPML reference in addition to Javed Kayani's in the reference who is an account holder of Habib Bank AG Zuerich Lahore, who opened fictitious accounts in the bank in the names of Sulman Zia, Muhammad Ramzan and Asghar Ali on August 26, 1992.
Giving conclusion of its finding over Mian Nawaz Sharif's assets beyond means, the JIT submitted that facts reveal that he in fact was the chairman of the Board, drawing salary from Capital FZE, a company owned by his son Hassan Nawaz. It added that Nawaz Sharif had not disclosed the fact in any statuary returns or declarations before the authorities in Pakistan, be it the income tax returns or the tax returns filings before the Election Commission of Pakistan.
"Nawaz Sharif in his tax returns filed before the authorities for the year 2013, claimed to have made a donation of Rs 100 million to Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz and concealing the fact that he received back Rs 45 million from the same party account, before the close of the relevant financial year end; amounts to mis-declaration of wealth," stated the JIT report. The JIT said that later Mian Muhammad Sharif's financial statement doesn't substantiate claim of Mian Nawaz Sharif that his 'business empire' is based on his inherited money from his father who owned million of rupees.
"Having gone through financial details of his companies/bank accounts and his declarations in FBR record, it seems that Nawaz Sharif is in possession of 'Assets beyond known sources of income," the JIT report said. The JIT also said, "Failure on the part of all respondents to produce the requisite information confirming known sources of income is prima facie tantamount to not being able to justify and the means of income."
Copyright Business Recorder, 2017