LAHORE, May 28(ABC): Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s counsel Saturday argued that the Rs16 billion money laundering case was “politically motivated” and “based on mala fide intentions” because the PTI government wanted to imprison his client.
The arguments came during the hearing of the money laundering case at the special court (Central-I) where the prime minister and his son Punjab Chief Minister Hamza Shehbaz also appeared.
Strict security measures were been put in place and the court’s premises were evacuated before the duo’s arrival.
During the previous hearing on May 21, the special court had issued arrest warrants for Suleman Shehbaz, son of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, in the case after extending the interim bail of Shehbaz Sharif and Hamza Shehbaz till May 28.
‘Politically motivated’
During the course of the proceedings, PM Shehbaz Sharif apprised the court that he had never received his salary, TA and DA from the national kitty, which is around Rs70 to Rs80 million, despite it being his legal right. The prime minister asked if he would launder just Rs2.5 million.
“In this case, I am accused of laundering Rs2.5 million,” said the prime minister.
The prime minister said his family suffered Rs2 billion but he did not give subsidies to favour the sugar mills. Later, he and CM Hamza Shehbaz left the courtroom after being granted permission by the judge.
Amjad Pervaiz, Shehbaz Sharif’s counsel, argued that the prime minister has nothing to do with the accounts opened or closed in the past 10 years.
However, the burden of proof in the case lies with the prosecution, argued Amjad Pervaiz.
He maintained that the PTI-led government’s focus was on imprisoning Shehbaz Sharif and this [money laundering] case is mala fide because it is politically motivated. “The facts in the challan submitted by the FIA were incorrect.”
Referring to the law, the counsel said if there are 10 cases against anyone, then he/she will not be arrested separately in each case.
“The [previous] government knew that this case could not be proved in the court,” the lawyer said, adding that the courts issued their verdicts in favour of his client.
