Capt Safdar claims disclosing assets ISLAMABAD: Retired Capt Mohammad Safdar, son-in-law of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, submitted to the Supreme Court on Friday a one-page terms of reference (ToR) suggesting that the proposed commission on the Panama Papers leaks be allowed to examine information relating to transfer from Pakistan of funds originating from corruption, commission and kickbacks and identify the individuals involved in such crimes.
A five-judge SC bench, headed by Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali, is seized with a set of petitions seeking the prime minister’s disqualification for his alleged investment in offshore companies.
On Thursday, the bench had asked the parties to submit their respective rejoinders to the points raised in the petitions as well as terms of reference.
Capt Safdar, who had filed his reply on Thursday, said in his ToR that the proposed commission should examine information relating to involvement of Pakistani citizens, persons of Pakistan origin and legal entities in offshore companies in Panama or any other country and determine if any law in force for the time being had been infringed and, if so, fix responsibility for such infringement.
Claims disclosing assets, liabilities of wife Maryam In his nomination papers
The commission should also determine if the provisions of laws relating to income tax, wealth tax, foreign exchange, companies and elections in force at the relevant time have been infringed with regard to properties held by offshore companies, source of income utilised to purchase properties, tax payable or paid on the income and details of the sellers of the properties.
The proposed commission, the ToR said, should examine information relating to written-off bank loans, including the report on such loans of a commission earlier set up by the Supreme Court, as well as other cases of loans written off after the period covered by the commission by former or present holders of the public office.
The commission should also determine if loans were written off through political influence or other than commercial considerations.
Meanwhile, in his reply submitted to the Supreme Court, Capt Safdar claimed that the petition moved against him by PTI chief Imran Khan was based on allegations and, therefore, liable to be dismissed.
He said the entire case against him had been built on the false, misconceived and incorrect assertion that he had failed to disclose assets and liabilities of his wife Maryam in his nomination papers filed at the time of general elections in 2013, and thus violated the provisions of the Constitution and the Representation of People Act 1976, entailing penal consequences of disqualification from being a member of parliament.
Capt Safdar claimed that he had duly disclosed the assets and liabilities of his wife in the nomination papers by enclosing her tax returns. His wife is neither the owner of the assets alleged in the petition as not disclosed nor owes any liabilities as alleged.
Maryam Safdar, the rejoinder contended, was a regular taxpayer and duly submitted her tax returns with the tax department wherein all the assets and liabilities standing in her name had been duly disclosed.
“Thus the petition is based on unsubstantiated facts/documents containing false and incorrect information and is liable to be dismissed with special costs,” Capt Safdar said, adding that the petitioner should be put to strict proof of the allegations made in the petition.