Avenfield reference: NAB failed to shift burden of proof on Nawaz, argues defence

Khawaja Haris, the lead counsel of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, stated on Wednesday that the prosecution team of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) had “miserably failed” to shift the burden of proof on the Sharif family in the Avenfield properties reference. During a hearing of the reference in an accountability court today, Haris, in his concluding arguments in the case, argued that scores of judgments of the Supreme Court (SC) had set certain preconditions for shifting of the onus of proof on the accused, which were not followed in the ongoing case. Unlike the final arguments of NAB’s prosecutor Sardar Muzaffar Abbasi, who had mainly read out the witness statement of Wajid Zia for about four days and did not mention any legal precedence related to the case, Haris submitted copies of Pakistani and Indian court judgements to establish that the bureau did not follow set criteria. Referring to Section 14(C) of the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), Haris said that though the law says that the accused needs to prove their innocence, it can only be done once the prosecution establishes a case beyond any shadow of doubt. Citing apex court verdicts in cases related to Khalid Aziz versus NAB and Hakim Ali Zardari versus NAB, the defence counsel argued that the superior court had laid down four prerequisites for shifting the burden of proof on the defendant. .He said that the apex court made it mandatory for the prosecution to prove that the accused was holding public office when the alleged property was purchased; that his pecuniary resources were not commensurate with the assets in his possession; the amount of declared wealth of the accused person when the assets were acquired; and finally, the prosecution must prove objectively that the assets were not proportionate to the financial means.Haris claimed that despite the SC’s clear directions, the prosecution, in this case, had miserably failed to fulfill even one of the conditions. Haris maintained that not a single prosecution witness, including star witness Wajid Zia, had admitted to having evidence of the ownership of London properties by Nawaz Sharif. The defence counsel termed the testimony of Zia a “pack of lies” and said: “I wonder [how] a man could lie to such an extent.” He further argued that the prosecution, in order to link Sharif to the London flats, had tried to establish a connection through the settlement of Al-Tawfeek Investment.