ISLAMABAD: Recalling an old dictum, Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar on Thursday asked the political parties to maintain the respect of the Supreme Court by keeping political disputes out of the judiciary.

“There is an old doctrine from the US that political dirt should not be washed in the laundry of the judiciary, so that the dignity of institutions is not hurt,” the chief justice observed, admitting that political matters were bound to creep in during the course of the hearing of the case at hand.

The three-judge bench was hearing a petition instituted by Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader Hanif Abbasi seeking the disqualification of Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) chief Imran Khan and his secretary general Jahangir Tareen for not disclosing their assets, owning offshore companies and receiving foreign funding for the PTI.

“Our purpose is to preserve the sanctity of the proceedings,” the chief justice observed.

SC told Imran violated the law by incorporating PTI-USA to collect funds from abroad

The remarks came at the outset of Thursday’s hearing when senior counsel Mohammad Akram Sheikh told the court on behalf of his client, Mr Abbasi, that although his side had honoured the court’s directions to not hold media talks within the SC premises, PTI leaders had not done the same.

The chief justice observed that this was most unfortunate, adding that the precincts of the SC were a sacred place.

Mr Sheikh deplored that the PML-N had been criticised for almost a year after every hearing of the Panama Papers case. He also recalled that he was threatened with lynching when he conducted the “sensational” high treason case against former president Gen Pervez Musharraf, adding that he kept his cool even when his grandchildren beseeched him to quit the case, out of fear for his life.

Advocate Anwar Mansoor said that he too was attacked during the treason case, but said “we should not lose our cool”.

Justice Umar Ata Bandial, however, told both parties that the court had requested senior counsel to speak to the media only if they needed to clarify something; and that the media should report court proceedings. But third parties with political motives or interests should not use the hearings as a springboard to project their own views, he said.

“We only want that the proceedings should not become a pendulum or a ping-pong ball being thrown against each other with statements and counter-statements,” Justice Bandial said, adding the court did not wish to see judges being maligned.

During Thursday’s proceedings, Mr Sheikh argued that he was not seeking the dissolution of the PTI, but only the disqualification of Imran Khan, under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution, for making false declarations before the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) between 2010 and 2013 under Section 13(2)(a) of the Political Parties Order by pledging that the party did not receive any funding from a source prohibited under the law.

As chairman of the PTI, Mr Khan appointed PTI-USA as its agent under the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA), an authority working under the United States Department of Justice, to collect foreign funding not just from individuals but also corporate entities that could be enemies of Pakistan, since the purpose of incorporating a company was to conceal the identity of donors, he said.

He also cited a letter, written by Mr Khan to the US Department of Justice on Feb 15, 2010, apprising it that the objective of appointing PTI-USA was to collect funds to promote the party in Pakistan and abroad, in contravention of Pakistani laws that bar foreign funding.

Also among the objectives was to promote better a understanding between US and Pakistani citizens through seminars, open public meetings and cultural exchange programmes, etc.

The counsel deplored that five of PTI-USA’s seven directors were US citizens and the funds collected from US citizens and companies were being sent and utilised in stark violation of Article 6(3) and (4) read with Article 2(c iii) of the PPO, making Mr Khan liable to action under Articles 62(1)(f) and 63(1)(p) of the Constitution for knowingly and intentionally making a false declaration.

Mr Khan could not claim to be ignorant of PTI-USA’s activities, as the registration statement stipulated that the registrant deals with Mr Khan as PTI chairman, he said, adding that between 2010 and 2013, the party collected $2.3 million.

The counsel argued that Niazi Services was incorporated and registered on May 10, 1983, under the law of Jersey Island. The offshore company remained active until 2015, and had been filing returns when it was finally dissolved.

Mr Khan admitted to Niazi Services’ existence when he said it was incorporated by him to purchase an apartment in London, and yet Niazi Services finds no mention in any of his assets and liabilities statements before the ECP whichspecifically contains a column for business capital held outside Pakistan.

When the court asked the counsel to cite the laws under which Mr Khan was required to disclose foreign properties in his income tax statements, the counsel conceded that he was not a tax expert, but would seek advice from a tax lawyer. He hastened to add that there was a time when it was mandatory to disclose such properties.

The court then postponed further proceedings until May 8.

Published in Dawn, May 5th, 2017