Plea filed in ECP to get Imran disqualified

An application has been filed in the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) seeking disqualification of PTI Chairman Imran Khan after the electoral watchdog ruled that the former ruling party indeed received prohibited funding. The application has been filed by Amun Taraqqi Party Chairman Faiq Shah. It requested the election supervisor to disqualify the PTI chairman under Article 62 (1)(f) of the Constitution for submitting false affidavit. It urged the ECP to withdraw all the perks and privileges from Imran he received as MNA and premier. While referring to Faisal Vawda’s case, the plea said that the PTI leader was disqualified for submitting a fake affidavit and was ordered to return all the privileges he enjoyed being in office. The plea also sought the removal of Imran from the party chairmanship. Earlier in the day, the electoral watchdog, in a unanimous verdict, ruled that the PTI did indeed receive prohibited funding and issued a notice to the party asking why the funds should not be confiscated.

from Pakistan News, Latest News Pakistan, Pakistan Headline | The Express Tribune https://ift.tt/8yUYMCZ

Legal minds all aflutter on Imran’s political fate

A legal debate has started whether the sword of disqualification is still hanging over PTI Chairman Imran Khan on account of submitting false certificates as declared by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). Earlier in the day, the electoral watchdog held that Imran for financial year – 2008-09 to 2012-13 (five years) – had submitted Form-1 which was found to be grossly inaccurate on the basis of financial statements obtained by it. "This Commission is constrained to hold that Mr Imran Khan failed to discharge his obligations as mandated under the Pakistani Statutes. The Chairman PTI has or successive five years (2008-2009 to 2012-2013) under review and examination has submitted Form-1 and signed a Certificate which is not consistent with [the] accounting information before us which has been gathered and complied on the basis of information obtained from Banks through [the] State Bank of Pakistan," the ECP judgment said. The Supreme Court in PML-N leader Hanif Abbasi case did not shut door to examine the matter related to submission of false certificates by Imran Khan to the ECP. The top court kept the door open to adjudicate the question on disqualification of Imran. Former chief justice of Pakistan Mian Saqib Nisar while authoring judgment held that it was a settled law that where the law requires something to be done in a particular manner must be done in that manner. "Another important canon of law is that what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. Therefore, as mentioned above, before any finding by a Court of law can be given as to whether a certificate issued by a head of a political party under Article 13(2) of the PPO is false or not, the question whether that political party has either received contributions or donations prohibited under Article 6(3) supra or is a foreign-aided political party in terms of Article 2(c) supra must respectively be addressed and determined by the competent forum." The top court observed had observed that subject to an adverse finding and corresponding penal action taken under the PPO, the issue of the falsity of the certificate under Article 13(2) would then be ascertainable as a secondary fact by a competent Court of law. Accordingly, it would be appropriate for this Court not to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution so as to avoid interfering with the power and jurisdiction specifically conferred by the PPO upon the special fora i.e. the Federal Government and the ECP respectively, the judgment said. This is more-so the case when the petitioner himself, relies upon Article 2(c)(iii) and 6(3) PPO for seeking relief from this Court but has failed to approach the respective fora provided under the law for such relief. In view of the non-determination of the primary facts by the competent fora, we are not inclined to adjudicate the relief claimed by the petitioner that the Respondent is disqualified under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution for having filed false certificates under Article 13(2) of the PPO," the judgment added. In view of this para, it is clear that the Supreme Court refrained to pass any observation on merit of case related to submission of false certificates. However, after the ECP decision, the matter can be raised before the court of law for life time disqualification of Imran. PTI MNA Barrister Maleeka Bokhari while talking to The Express Tribune said that it was a well settled principle that every misdeclaration or non-disclosure of personal asset would not suffice for the purposes of a 62(1)(f) permanent disqualification. "For the purposes of current legal debate on 62(1)(f) application on alleged non-disclosure or misdeclaration by Imran Khan in certificate presented before ECP, the flawed debate being undertaken does not consider the difference between an affidavit given under oath & a mere certificate, confirming certain facts to the best of one's knowledge." Maleeka further stated that in any event the non-disclosure or purported misdeclaration does not pertain to personal assets of the PTI chairman in his nomination papers. The subject matter in this is certification of audited accounts prepared by an auditor. However, she said if some people without any legal understanding in law or Constitution insist on the equalisation between non-disclosure of personal assets in a nomination form and certification of party accounts before ECP, it should be noted that the "Superior court through Jurisprudence has settled in 2021 SCMR 988 & other judgments that the returned candidate would be disqualified only when if he/she had dishonestly acquired assets and was hiding them to derive certain benefits. If the non-disclosure or mis-declaration was such that it gave an illegal advantage to a candidate then it would lead to termination of his candidature. Mere fact that a candidate had not declared an asset in the nomination papers would not end in his disqualification but it had to be seen whether the act of non-disclosure of the asset was with dishonest intent or not and only if there was dishonest intent behind the nondisclosure, the candidate would be disqualified. It was the credibility of the explanation that would be the determining factor as to whether non-disclosure of an asset carried with it the element of dishonesty. All nondisclosure of assets can be read with the same eye." "Under no application of jurisprudence on 62(1)(f) can the same be attributed to prohibited funding case before ECP," she said. Former Sindh High Court president Salahuddin Ahmed maintained that the case of Article 62 (1) (f) against Imran would be quite serious. "I think case for banning/dissolving PTI would be frivolous," he added. Another lawyer stated that false affidavit part was the only possibly serious aspect, if the powers that be want to make it serious. During the hearing on August 1, 2017 former CJP Saqib Nisar had observed that penal consequence of collection of funds through prohibited sources was confiscation and not disqualification of party’s chief. There is inconsistency regarding applicability of Article 62 (1) (f) of constitution. The top court had applied strict liability in Panamagate wherein former premier Nawaz Sharif was disqualified for life for non-disclosure of his assets in the nomination papers. The same was done in Jahangir Tareen’s case. READ Nawaz urges govt to ‘immediately take action against Imran’ after ECP verdict However, same principle was not followed in PML-N’s Khawaja Asif case. After lifetime disqualification of Nawaz and Tareen, Supreme Court in Asif’s case laid down an “objective criteria” to test the honesty of lawmakers by declaring that Article 62 (1)(f) cannot be applied to every omission or non-disclosure of assets. In 2018, then chief justice Saqib Nisar had constituted a five-judge larger bench led by himself to examine whether or not the disqualification under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution was for life. The Supreme Court had held that if it declared that a lawmaker was not “sadiq” and “Ameen” (truthful and trustworthy) under the article, then they would be permanently disqualified from contesting the elections. However, the verdict has been criticised by senior lawyers on several grounds, including the very nature of the bench that passed the landmark ruling. The legal eagles raised objections that out of five, four judges – Saqib Nisar, Azmat Saeed Sheikh, Umar Ata Bandial and Ijazul Ahsan – of the bench belonged to Punjab. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, who belonged to Sindh, was also part of that larger bench. Interestingly, all “like-minded” judges were part of the benches that issued rulings in high-profile cases. Even Justice retired Sheikh Azmat Saeed, who was part of Panama bench had noted that a plain reading of Article 62(1)(f) of the constitution revealed that in order to be a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament), the person must be, inter alia, sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest, and ameen. However, if there is a declaration by a court of law to the contrary i.e. he is not sagacious or righteous or non-profligate, honest, and ameen then such person shall not be qualified to be a Member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament). Justice Saeed observed that a declaration by the court of law would mean a conclusive finding. “Obviously, such finding would be with regard to a list before the Court, arising out of the violation of a law or non-fulfillment of a legal obligation. It is clear and obvious that lack of qualifications in terms of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is the effect of a declaration by a Court of Law to the contrary, which is the cause. “The obvious, legal and logical conclusion would be as long as the cause i.e. the declaration of a Court of Law holds the field, its effect i.e. the lack of qualification shall also prevail. This appears to be the only possible interpretation of Article 62(1)(f) of the constitution.”   Expansion of jurisdiction Azmat Saeed Sheikh expanded his jurisdiction and held that it can initiate suo motu proceedings to examine the qualification of lawmakers. "We cannot abdicate our responsibility by brushing the issues floating on the surface under the carpet. Hence, we have no other option but to convert the instant proceedings into suo motu proceedings under Article 184(3) of the constitution so as to examine the cases of the parties on the basis of the material available on record so as to examine the Order of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) dated June 20, 2017 by determining whether Bhatti was…disqualified or not qualified for being a member of the provincial assembly under the constitution,” stated a 31-page judgment, authored by Justice Sheikh in Shaukat Bhatti case. In an another matter, Sheikh observed that allowing a disqualified person become member of parliament or provincial assemblies would be considered as the apex court’s failure to protect and preserve the constitution. “Even where a matter comes before this court regarding the qualification or disqualification of a Member of the Majlis-e-Shoora or the Provincial Assemblies otherwise by way of proceedings other than under Article 184(3) of the constitution, this court not only has the jurisdiction to convert such proceedings to proceedings under Article 184(3) of the constitution but is bound to do so, as to permit an unqualified or disqualified person to continue to defile and desecrate the Majlis-eShoora or the Provincial Assemblies and masqulate as a chosen representative of the people would amount to frustrating the constitutional provisions.” “In such an eventuality, if this court looks the other way, it would perhaps constitute a failure to protect and preserve the Constitution,” Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed said while authoring the detailed judgment regarding the disqualification of PTI Member of Provincial Assembly (MPA) Abdul Munim in May 2018. Later, the court set aside the lifetime disqualification of PTI Balochistan chief Yar Muhammad Rind in the fake degree case, declaring that such disqualifications must be based on oral or documentary evidence and not presumptions. In May last year, the apex court reiterated that it was now a well-settled principle that every non-disclosure or misdeclaration would not be sufficient enough to permanently disqualify a member of parliament or a candidate under Article 62 (1) (f). “The purpose and intention need to be seen behind the non-disclosure or misdeclaration. The returned candidate would be disqualified only when if he/she has dishonestly acquired assets and is hiding them to derive certain benefits,” an 11-page judgment authored by Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi stated. The verdict was issued on a petition filed by a politician, Shamona Badshah Qaisarani, who was disqualified for lifetime over non-disclosure of her agricultural property inherited from her parents in the nomination papers. The court said that it was the credibility of the explanation that would be the determining factor as to whether non-disclosure of an asset carried with it the element of dishonesty or not. In view of the latest judgment, several lawyers contended that Tareen could not be disqualified for life. Justice Qazi Faez Isa had also posed seven questions to determine the eligibility criteria of lawmakers. Senior lawyers believe that CJP Umar Ata Bandial should form full court/larger bench to review its decisions regarding lifetime disqualification of Nawaz and Tareen. If anyone approaches the apex court seeking disqualification of Imran on account of ECP findings then composition of bench will be significant to decide the matter.  

from Pakistan News, Latest News Pakistan, Pakistan Headline | The Express Tribune https://ift.tt/K3N2DOt

Prohibited case: Former ruling party in for a long-winded legal wrangle

In April 2017, the PML-N celebrated the verdict in the Panama Papers’ case without realising what it entailed for them. “Celebrations,” PML-N leader Maryam Nawaz had tweeted and shared photos of her father Nawaz Sharif, uncle Shehbaz Sharif and other party leaders, who were all smile and jubilant over the Supreme Court’s split decision which neither gave a clean chit nor disqualified the former prime minister but ordered the formation of a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) to probe the case further. The PML-N didn’t realise back then that it was just calm before the storm; it massively downplayed the decision, and Ahsan Iqbal had declared it “a historic victory”. Conversely, PTI leader Fawad Chaudhry had chided the PML-N leadership, saying they didn’t seem to have read the full judgment and haven’t realised what has actually happened to them. Former financial czar Asad Umar had tweeted that “not a single judge found Nawaz Sharif innocent”. Nevertheless, the Panama case judgment made both the PML-N and the PTI ecstatic and they celebrated it. Fast forward to the Election Commission of Pakistan’s Tuesday’s decision found that the PTI received funding from prohibited sources; it got funds from 34 foreign nationals and 351 foreign-based companies; it hid 13 accounts; and Form-1 submitted by PTI Chairman Imran Khan is “grossly inaccurate”. The ECP also issued a notice to the PTI to explain why funds shouldn’t be confiscated. Surprisingly, the PML-N and the PTI have once again celebrated the ECP’s judgment; Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif terming it a charge-sheet against Imran Khan while the PTI leadership downplaying the verdict just like the PML-N did in the Panama case. Following the ECP judgment, Fawad defended the PTI chairman by saying that Imran Khan only signed audited accounts when he was told that all the accounts were legal. While blaming the accountants, Fawad said how Imran Khan could have declared hidden accounts when he was not even aware about them, saying the PTI chief simply believed his accountants. Asad Umar said that people trust Imran Khan and that’s why they sent their money to him, adding there was no threat to Imran Khan’s political future. Neither the PML-N realised back then how painful the judgment would turn out to be nor does PTI appear to be in a mood to even accept that all is not well for it as the decision will trigger a series of legal challenges at a time when it is gearing up for the next general elections. “The immediate threat of dissolution of the party is over but the larger threat is still looming large on the PTI,” renowned constitutional expert Hafiz Ahsaan Ahmad Khokhar said. “There will be little chance to challenge the ECP notice as it has sought explanation from the PTI,” the expert said, adding challenging the notice before a high court would be struck down on the grounds of maintainability and the PTI will have to reply to notice and then the ECP would give a final judgment in the case. Khokhar also poured cold water on celebrations in the government’s camp by saying that the federal government can’t take any action by itself until the ECP sends a reference to the federal government, saying the ECP has so far only sent a copy of the decision to it which, too, was beyond the mandate given in the Political Parties Order of 2002. “Right now, the federal government has nothing in its hands; all it can do is to issue political statements,” Khokhar said, saying any action taken by the federal will likely be set aside by courts. He explained that the “moot point before the Supreme Court would be the words mentioned in law, the receipt of substantial or portion of foreign funding or the application of the Election Act 2017 with prospective or retrospective effect in case the order of ECP would be challenged before the superior courts.” Renowned political analyst Mazhar Abbas said that the Political Parties Order, 2002, and the Election Act, 2017 are very clear, saying accepting donations, contribution from foreigners, multinational companies or foreign country completely prohibited under the law. “All is not well for the PTI in this verdict whether they accept it or not,” he tweeted. Political and legal experts said that equating a political party with a corporate entity was a false argument in its entirety, adding that blaming the accountants was like blaming the knives. They said that the PTI was currently in a state of denial because the case might take months if it is continuously heard under the PPO, 2002. However, they added, if ECP applies the Election Act of 2017 retrospectively, then the matter could be concluded within a few weeks or months and that might not spell well for the PTI when it finally goes into elections.

from Pakistan News, Latest News Pakistan, Pakistan Headline | The Express Tribune https://ift.tt/MNY1q4y

Govt weighs knock-out punch

The ECP’s ruling that the PTI did receive prohibited funding after an eight-year delay has come as a shot in the arm of the beleaguered ruling coalition that swung into action on Tuesday to find ways to knock out the Imran Khan-led party. The federal government is also tapping into Article 17(3) of the Constitution to trigger legal proceedings against PTI and seeking the federal cabinet’s approval for a permanent ban on the party. Speaking to The Express Tribune, Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar hinted at the possibility of legal action against PTI in the wake of ECP’s ruling by declaring it a “foreign-aided” party. Tarar said that the government could notify the PTI as a foreign funded political party and could also forward a reference to the Supreme Court. Addressing a press conference along with Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah, the law minister said that the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs, the Ministry of Law and Justice and the Ministry of Interior would consider each word of the Election Commission's decision in detail and the law would take its course. He said that Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz leader Hanif Abbasi had filed a petition before the Supreme Court with reference to Imran Khan using prohibited funds for creating chaos and disorder in the country, on which the apex court had stated that the Election Commission of Pakistan would examine this matter. He said that the Supreme Court had also stated that the federal government would decide to ban the party on ECP's report regarding foreign funding. The third option up the government’s sleeves, the law minister emphasised, was the knocking at the Supreme Court’s doors. He explained that in the Hanif Abbasi case, the top court had made a false affidavit subject to the decision of the ECP or any other court. “And now that the ECP has declared Imran Khan's affidavit invalid, the federal government can directly refer the fake affidavit to the apex court to pave a legal way for Imran’s disqualification under Article 62, 63,” the law minister added. It is pertinent to note that the apex court discussed in detail the question of foreign funding in its 2017 judgment on a petition filed by PML-N leader Hanif Abbasi, who had sought the disqualification of Imran Khan. The SC bench led by the former CJP Mian Saqib Nisar, while making a distinction between a ‘foreign aided’ party and ‘prohibited funding’, referred the case on December 16, 2017, to the ECP for a probe. The judgment noted that it is the duty of the ECP to scrutinise accounts of political parties on the touchstone of Article 6(3) of the PPO read in light of Article 17(3) of the Constitution. PML-N’s counsel Akram Sheikh had submitted that the PTI is a ‘foreign-aided’ political party in terms of Article 2(c) (iii) of the Political Parties Ordinance (PPO) 2002 as it received contributions prohibited under Article 6(3) thereof read with Article 17(3) of the Constitution. He had argued that despite the above-stated position, Imran Khan personally issued certificates to the ECP in terms of Article 13(2) of the PPO to the effect that PTI “does not receive funds from prohibited sources”, meaning thereby that it is not a foreign-aided political party. “He is, therefore, liable to be disqualified from holding elective office or being elected thereto under Articles 62(1) (f) and (g), and 63(1)(p) of the Constitution,” he had said. However, the apex court in its judgment had noted that it is not the case that the PTI was formed or organised at the instance of any government or political party of a foreign country or is affiliated to or associated with any government or political party of a foreign country, or receives any aid, financial or otherwise, from any government or political party of a foreign country.   Govt to place PTI leaders on ECL Meanwhile, in tandem with its other efforts to initiate legal proceedings against PTI, the government on Tuesday also decided to place the names of PTI leaders on the Exit Control List (ECL). The government has decided to include the names of former National Assembly speaker Asad Qaiser, former Sindh Governor Imran Ismail, Ahad Rasheed, Samar Ali Khan, Seema Zia, and Najeeb Haroon. Jahangir Rahman, Khalid Masood and Zafarullah Khattak will also not be able to go abroad after being named in the ECL.

from Pakistan News, Latest News Pakistan, Pakistan Headline | The Express Tribune https://ift.tt/4wNKRHx

Undeterred PTI puts on a brave face following ECP verdict

Following the ECP’s ruling in the PTI prohibited funding case, the party on Tuesday appeared to be putting a positive spin on the conclusion of the eight-year-old case, insisting the verdict has actually proved its own stance that it was not being doled out foreign funds. The top election supervisory body, in its verdict on Tuesday, ruled that the PTI had indeed received prohibited funds and that it had only owned eight accounts before the commission and declared 13 accounts to be unknown. The order also said that it was “constrained to hold that Imran Khan failed to discharge his obligations as mandated under the Pakistani statutes.” However, addressing a press conference, PTI leader Farrukh Habib maintained that the case only vindicated PTI's long-held stance that it was not a "foreign-funded" party, as alleged by the political rivals. He pointed out the silver lining in the case, saying  the PTI has merely been issued a notice and has not been banned. He added the show-cause notice will be responded to adequately. The party claimed that “no foreign funding has been proven”, and that the verdict has only exposed “another propaganda” of the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) – a coalition of political parties that remain staunch critics of the PTI. ‘Only party to run on fundings’ Speaking to the media, senior party leader, Fawad Chaudhry said that the PTI was the “only party in Pakistan that does funding.” adding that the party “does not hide its funding from the people”. "Oversees Pakistanis have also funded” the party, stated the former minister and questioned why the PML-N considers them "enemy”. Admitting that the party should have declared 16 accounts, however, he said that “Imran Khan did not know about them”. In a tweet earlier this morning, Fawad had termed the verdict as “no big deal”. “The election commission is not going to make political decisions. The real decision is to be made by the people,” he had stated. He furthered that “both the Supreme Court and the High Court have decided that the ECP should decide the cases of all three [major] political parties together,” and accused the electoral watchdog of not looking into the PML-N and Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP)’s funding. Continuing the attack on the electoral watchdog, PTI General-Secretary Asad Umar said that the commission is “acting like a political party instead of an unbiased institution”. Umar questioned why the ECP was not releasing the funding reports of rival parties in the ruling coalition, which he termed a “violation of the Supreme Court and High Court’s directives". Echoing similar sentiments, Awami Muslim League (AML) Chairman Sheikh Rashid demanded the Chairman Election Commission (CEC) resign from his post. He said that “nobody could cause Imran any damage” regardless of how hard they tried. Much ado about nothing,” he remarked.

from Pakistan News, Latest News Pakistan, Pakistan Headline | The Express Tribune https://ift.tt/I5vPU0C

Nawaz urges govt to ‘immediately take action against Imran’ after ECP verdict

PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif on Tuesday urged the coalition government, led by his younger brother Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, to “immediately” take legal action against former premier Imran Khan after the ECP verdict in the PTI prohibited funding case. “There is no doubt left after this [ECP] report that he [Imran Khan] was enforcing the foreign agenda in the country,” he said while speaking to reporters in London. الیکشن کمیشن کی رپورٹ کے بعد مجھے کوئی شک نہیں کہ عمران خان ایک فارن ایجنڈے پر تھے اور غیر ملکی ایجنڈے کو ملک پر نافذ کر رہے تھے ۔ سابق وزیراعظم نواز شریف pic.twitter.com/MrAjxsFGbc — Hassan Ayub Khan (@HassanAyub82) August 2, 2022 Earlier in the day, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) ruled that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf received 'prohibited funds' from 34 foreign nationals and 351 companies based outside the country. The party was issued a show cause notice after the unanimous verdict — reserved in June earlier this year – by the three-member bench of the ECP headed by Chief Election Commissioner Sikander Sultan Raja. "The Commission directs that a notice may be issued to the Respondent party [PTI] in terms of Rule-6 of PPR 2002, as to why the aforementioned prohibited funds may not be confiscated. The office is also directed to initiate any other action under the law, in light of this order of the Commission," stated the 68-page judgement - a copy of which is available with The Express Tribune. Referring to the decision, the PML-N supremo said the ECP verdict was based on “concrete evidence and facts”. “The one [Imran] who calls others a coward and a bandit turned out to be the biggest thief himself in the country’s history,” he added. Also read: ECP says PTI received 'prohibited funds' from 34 foreign nationals Nawaz — the three-time former prime minister who has been living in London since November 2019 on medical grounds — said Imran had been demanding the chief election commissioner's resignation because the PTI chairman knew that he had committed the “country’s biggest robbery”. “Imran Khan was declared Sadiq [truthful] and Ameen [righteous] on the basis of fake documents,” he remarked. ایک وقت آئیگا جب سابق چیف جسٹس ثاقب نثار ، سابق چیف جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ اور جسٹس ریٹائرڈ عظمت سعید شیخ کو حساب دینا ہوگا۔ سابق وزیر اعظم میاں نواز شریف pic.twitter.com/MmezqLaLhg — Hassan Ayub Khan (@HassanAyub82) August 2, 2022 The former premier while recalling his ouster from power in 2017 said his then government was taking the country towards progress but the Imran-led regime “destroyed the economy and reversed all gains”. He also hit out at former apex court judges who ruled against him in the famous Panama Papers case, saying former chief justice Saqib Nisar and others will also be held accountable for the bringing the country to this point. Referring to his conviction by the top court, Nawaz said it happened for the first time in the country’s history that a prime minister was disqualified “for not receiving a salary from his son”. “Imran Khan’s fitna [mischief] must be ended forever. Political parties should also play their role in it... it is becoming difficult to rebuild Pakistan after four years of destruction,” he added.

from Pakistan News, Latest News Pakistan, Pakistan Headline | The Express Tribune https://ift.tt/GOpb8l4

Nawaz urges govt to ‘immediately take action against Imran’ after ECP verdict

PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif on Tuesday urged the coalition government, led by his younger brother Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, to “immediately” take legal action against former premier Imran Khan after the ECP verdict in the PTI prohibited funding case. “There is no doubt left after this [ECP] report that he [Imran Khan] was enforcing the foreign agenda in the country,” he said while speaking to reporters in London. الیکشن کمیشن کی رپورٹ کے بعد مجھے کوئی شک نہیں کہ عمران خان ایک فارن ایجنڈے پر تھے اور غیر ملکی ایجنڈے کو ملک پر نافذ کر رہے تھے ۔ سابق وزیراعظم نواز شریف pic.twitter.com/MrAjxsFGbc — Hassan Ayub Khan (@HassanAyub82) August 2, 2022 Earlier in the day, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) ruled that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf received 'prohibited funds' from 34 foreign nationals and 351 companies based outside the country. The party was issued a show cause notice after the unanimous verdict — reserved in June earlier this year – by the three-member bench of the ECP headed by Chief Election Commissioner Sikander Sultan Raja. "The Commission directs that a notice may be issued to the Respondent party [PTI] in terms of Rule-6 of PPR 2002, as to why the aforementioned prohibited funds may not be confiscated. The office is also directed to initiate any other action under the law, in light of this order of the Commission," stated the 68-page judgement - a copy of which is available with The Express Tribune. Referring to the decision, the PML-N supremo said the ECP verdict was based on “concrete evidence and facts”. “The one [Imran] who calls others a coward and a bandit turned out to be the biggest thief himself in the country’s history,” he added. Also read: ECP says PTI received 'prohibited funds' from 34 foreign nationals Nawaz — the three-time former prime minister who has been living in London since November 2019 on medical grounds — said Imran had been demanding the chief election commissioner's resignation because the PTI chairman knew that he had committed the “country’s biggest robbery”. “Imran Khan was declared Sadiq [truthful] and Ameen [righteous] on the basis of fake documents,” he remarked. ایک وقت آئیگا جب سابق چیف جسٹس ثاقب نثار ، سابق چیف جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ اور جسٹس ریٹائرڈ عظمت سعید شیخ کو حساب دینا ہوگا۔ سابق وزیر اعظم میاں نواز شریف pic.twitter.com/MmezqLaLhg — Hassan Ayub Khan (@HassanAyub82) August 2, 2022 The former premier while recalling his ouster from power in 2017 said his then government was taking the country towards progress but the Imran-led regime “destroyed the economy and reversed all gains”. He also hit out at former apex court judges who ruled against him in the famous Panama Papers case, saying former chief justice Saqib Nisar and others will also be held accountable for the bringing the country to this point. Referring to his conviction by the top court, Nawaz said it happened for the first time in the country’s history that a prime minister was disqualified “for not receiving a salary from his son”. “Imran Khan’s fitna [mischief] must be ended forever. Political parties should also play their role in it... it is becoming difficult to rebuild Pakistan after four years of destruction,” he added.

from Punjab News Updates and Insights - The Express Tribune https://ift.tt/GOpb8l4