ISLAMABAD   -  Khawaja Haris, defence counsel of Nawaz Sharif in Al-Azizia reference, while making his conclusive arguments before the Accountability Court on Monday argued that any statement of children of the former Prime Minister could not be used against him. He also added that even statement of Tariq Shafi could not be used against Nawaz Sharif. The hearing in Al-Azizia Steel Mills reference resumed here at the Accountability Court.  Khawaja Haris pointed out that veracity of mutual legal assistance received from the UAE authorities was doubtful. He also added that Al-Daar report could not be considered as verified evidence as entries mentioned in the report were not sufficient, which were not verified through relevant record.

He said that it was stated that Sharif handed over amount to Maryam Nawaz as gift while Maryam Nawaz is not associated with hearing of this case. Khawaja Haris also stated that as per prosecutor, 88 per cent profit was transferred to Nawaz Sharif; therefore, he is real owner.

Meanwhile, the prosecution is also of the view that a major share out of this amount, almost 70 per cent, was gifted to Maryam Nawaz by Nawaz Sharif. In this perspective, major beneficiary is Maryam Nawaz.

The defence counsel also pointed out that Accountability Court could not make its judgement on the basis of Panama JIT report. The witnesses who appeared before Panama JIT are not present before this court, Khawaja Haris said.

He said that Panama JIT relied on the statements of Tariq Shafi, Hassan Nawaz and Hussain Nawaz but all those statements recorded before Panama JIT could not be used against his client in this court.

Khawaja Haris said that Tariq Shafi, Hassan Nawaz and Hussain Nawaz did not appear before the Accountability Court to give explanation of their statements recorded before Panama JIT. He said that affidavit of Tariq Shafi could not be used against Nawaz Sharif. On this, Judge Accountability Court Arshad Malik remarked that your stance relates that Tariq Shafi did investment for Mian Muhammad Sharif but now you are stating that anything of Tariq Shafi could not be used. Should I ignore the entire issue of Tariq Shafi, remarked Judge Accountability Court Arshad Malik.

Later, on status of the MLA with the UAE, the AC judge also inquired that reply on MLA was received by Panama JIT during course of Investigation. After releasing the Panama JIT report, Hussain Nawaz did not seek verified record from UAE authorities. On this, Khawaja Haris said that Hussain Nawaz did not seek any such record.

He said that Wajid Zia provided wrong information to the UAE authorities in the MLA. The judge remarked that UAE authorities stated straight forwardly that they have not any record in their possession.

Khawaja Haris also pointed out that only UAE authorities could tell confidentiality, which reply they gave in connection with which record. Khawaja Haris also stated that in connection of profit share, Maryam Nawaz was major beneficiary. Ahead of proving Hussain Nawaz as ‘benamidar’, the prosecution had to prove that Nawaz Sharif was real owner of Hill Metal Establishment. The defence counsel also stated that some source documents were intentionally concealed by JIT, which were in favour of his clients, on which the NAB prosecutor stated that Khawaja Haris could present all such source documents in the court. On this Khawaja Haris stated that this was not his case. Further proceedings on this reference will be held on Tuesday (today).