Pakistan’s ousted leader assails court

ISLAMABAD — Pakistan’s ousted prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, sharply criticized the Supreme Court verdict that recently forced him to step down and said he was planning a rally in his hometown, Lahore, to galvanize public support for his political party and his future.

“What can be a bigger joke with the nation, and with a prime minister of the country, than this?” Sharif said, referring to the court verdict, in his first news conference since his removal from office on July 28 after the court ruled corruption allegations had disqualified him.

“It was not a verdict over corruption or kickbacks or embezzlement in the state funds,” said Sharif. “Had it been so, I would have been very ashamed.”

Sharif’s political party, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, elected one of his longtime loyalists as prime minister, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, who is expected to lead the government until general elections scheduled for next year. The new Cabinet, sworn in Friday, included almost all the ministers who had served under Sharif.

Both those developments seemed to indicate that Sharif, a populist leader who has served as prime minister three times, maintains a strong hold on his political party and will continue to call the shots from behind the scenes.

Sharif’s failure to disclose his role in a Dubaibased company run by one of his two sons led the Supreme Court to use a clause of the constitution that requires public officeholders to be “honest and faithful.”

“I never received any salary from my son’s company,” Sharif said. “How can a tax return about it be filed?”

He added, “I am a man who believes in the rule of law, but there should be law and there should be a rule.”

Revelations about the Sharif family’s offshore wealth first surfaced in last year’s Panama Papers, and since then, Sharif has faced allegations of corruption and money laundering.

After months of court hearings and an investigation ordered by the judiciary, the Supreme Court concluded in July that Sharif and his children could not justify the means to buy the expensive properties they owned in London.

“It was not a verdict over corruption or kickbacks or embezzlement in the state funds.” – NAWAZ SHARIF