The Pakistan Peoples’ Party leader said that former premier Nawaz should not have submitted a false affidavit, adding that the judgment will continue to dishonor the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz party leader.
“The Supreme Court has given its decision after a detailed examination of the case,” he said.
Shah said that Nawaz’s case is one of its own in the country’s political and judicial history.
SC’s detailed judgment
The SC in its detailed judgment rejected the review petitions filed by the Sharif family over the Panama Papers verdict.
On September 15, the apex court issued a short-order rejecting the review petitions of the Sharif family and Finance Minister Ishaq Dar against the July 28 judgment.
The five-member bench had disqualified Nawaz as prime minister on July 28 at the conclusion of the Panama Papers case.
In the detailed order, authored by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, the apex court held that the ousted prime minister tried to fool the court and people, both inside and outside of Parliament, and never came up before the court with the whole truth
“Nawaz even tried to fool the apex court without realizing, ‘You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time’,” it said.
‘Court couldn’t shut its eyes’
Justifying the dismissal of the review pleas, the verdict ruled that the court could not have shut its eyes when an asset of the petitioner arising out of Iqama (work permit) having surfaced during the investigation of the case and admitted by him to be his in no uncertain terms, was not found to have been disclosed in the election nomination papers.
The court also observed that a much higher level of integrity was expected of the holder of the highest elected office of the country, “but to our dismay and disappointment, the petitioner has not been fair and forthright in answering any of the queries made during the course of hearing.”
It further said since the country’s prime minister was thought to be the ethos personified of the nation and he represented at the national and international level, denying an asset established or defending a trust deed written in 2006 in a font becoming commercial in 2007 was below the dignity and decorum of the office he holds.
Quoting an Urdu couplet expressing a follower’s feelings about his leader, Justice Ejaz said: “Don’t talk about this and that thing, just tell us why the caravan was looted — We have no complaint with the passersby, it is a question of your leadership”.