ISLAMABAD: A former chief judge of Gilgit-Baltistan Supreme Appellate Court (SAC), Tuesday distanced himself from a purportedly signed affidavit claiming former chief justice Saqib Nisar did not want former prime minister Nawaz Sharif and his daughter Maryam Nawaz to be released on bail ahead of the general elections in July 2018.
The two were convicted in a National Accountability Bureau (NAB) reference related to their ownership of four multi-million-dollar London apartments weeks before the elections on July 25. When their counsels moved the high court for suspension of the conviction, the case was adjourned until the last week of July.
Nisar had travelled to the mountainous region for vacations in 2018, the affidavit of Rana Muhammad Shamim, a former office-bearer of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), read.
On one occasion, the then top judge appeared “very disturbed” while speaking to the Supreme Court registrar on the phone, asking him to get in touch with a high court judge.
Once able to get in touch with the judge, Mr Nisar ordered him that “Nawaz Sharif and Maryam Nawaz Sharif must remain in jail until the general elections are over. On assurances from the other side, he [Nisar] became calm and happily demanded another cup of tea.”
The other judge was not named in the affidavit.
Shamim appeared in person as the Islamabad High Court (IHC) Tuesday took up the contempt of court case against the suspects.
During the hearing, Attorney General Khalid Jawed Khan, Islamabad Advocate General Niaz Ullah Niazi, Jang Group Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Mir Shakeel ur-Rehman, The News Editor Aamir Ghouri and newspaper’s reporter Ansar Abbasi.
All four respondents were in court. Except Shamim, all had submitted their written responses to the court.
During the hearing, IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah asked Shamim whether he confirmed the affidavit released by Abbasi in his story is his? “Yes the statement is mine, I endorse [it],” responded Shaim.
On being asked how the statement got leaked, Shamim said he was unaware of it and added the original affidavit is saved in the United Kingdom with his grandson.
When Justice Minallah asked what purpose Shamim’s affidavit would have served and whether he had given it to a newspaper, the former judge responded, “My affidavit is sealed in a locker in the UK. I don’t know how it was leaked.”
The judge again pressed Shamim, asking him whether he had or had not given the affidavit concerned to the publication. “You must have recorded the affidavit for some purpose. You will inform in the written response how the affidavit was revealed after three years.”
Justice Minallah directed him to submit his original affidavit in the court along with his written response in the case within five days and adjourned the hearing until next week.
We have to confirm if the contents of the affidavit and the report published in The News are the same, the judge said. “Any difference between their contents will raise serious concerns [about the report’s authenticity].”
Justice Minallah said the case was related to “my court and its accountability”, adding, “along with media freedom, this case is also about the independence of the judiciary.”
