Maryam’s Panama link resurfaces
islamabad — German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung on Monday tweeted documents to “help” Pakistanis form their own opinion on the role of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif ’s daughter in Panamagate.
“For those in Pakistan who doubt the role of the Prime Minister’s daughter Mariam Safdar in Panama Papers — some of the documents. Judge yourself,” Süddeutsche Zeitung tweeted, along with attachments purporting to show Maryam Safdar’s involvement with Minerva Financial Services.
The tweet is accompanied by a document titled “Minerva Financial Services Limited Personal Information”, which contains the personal details of Maryam Safdar.
The “source of wealth” section on the form says “Family’s wealth and businesses which spreads [sic] over 60 years”.
A copy of Sharif’s daughter’s old passport also accompanied the tweet.
Süddeutsche Zeitung was the first news outlet to receive the 11.5 million secret files from Panamagate,
For those in Pakistan who doubt the role of the Prime Minister’s daughter Mariam safdar in Panama Papers — some of the documents. Judge yourself Süddeutsche Zeitung @SZ_Investigativ
which included the names of Pakistanis with offshore holdings.
During Panamagate hearings at the Supreme Court, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf has been trying to establish that Maryam Nawaz was indeed the beneficial owner of Minerva.
Minerva is the holding company for Nescoll Limited and Nielson Enterprises Limited, two off-shore enterprises at the middle of the scandal engulfing the Sharif family.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court on Monday resumed on Monday hearing of the Panamagate case, with Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) lawyer Taufiq Asif arguing Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s speech in the National Assembly (NA) last year was against the rules of the House, Dawn online reported. Taufiq maintained the Panamagate case is about the Sharif family, not the government. He said that NA Speaker Ayaz Sadiq allowed the PM to deliver a speech after suspending the proceedings of the Lower House, which is against the rules.
Justice Azmat Saeed advised the JI counsel to read Article 69 and argue his case according to that. Advocate Taufiq, however, maintained that the premier’s speech does not fall under Article 69 as it addressed allegations levelled at Nawaz Sharif on a personal level.
Once again, the question about the PM’s speech being a part of the proceedings of the NA was raised by Justice Khosa.
JI’s counsel replied that the speech was not part of the assembly’s agenda that day. The PM delivered his speech on a Monday whereas Tuesday is the designated day for House proceedings regarding private matters, Taufiq argued, adding that if the PM had to address a personal matter in his speech, he should have done it on Tuesday.
Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed asked the JI lawyer if the NA speaker does not have the right to suspend House proceedings and give the prime minister permission to deliver his speech.
“Was the prime minister not given the permission to conduct his speech by the speaker?” Justice Saeed enquired.
Justice Gulzar asked if anyone had objected to the PM’s speech in the National Assembly on that day, to which Taufiq replied that the Opposition walked out of the House in response to the PM’s speech.
Justice Gulzar enquired if Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s speech was stricken from the National Assembly’s record. Taufiq said that the speech is part of the record but the right of immunity does not extend to it.