THREAD: A review of the Avenfield Properties (assets beyond means) case of Nawaz Sharif with special reference to the recent acquittal of Maryam Nawaz on the charges of falsifying evidence and hence abetting and aiding in the crime. (1/n)
Much of the facts mentioned in the thread will be already known(with some little known) but all are included for completeness/chronology. Let us begin with the notorious clip of Maryam Nawaz saying she owns no properties in London or Pakistan.
Fast forward to April 2016, the leaked Panama papers show that the *beneficial owner* of Nelson and Niescol (the two companies that held the Avenfield flats) is Maryam Nawaz. Special emphasis on "beneficial" for reasons described later.
Upon pressure of the opposition, Nawaz Sharif came to the National Assembly on 16 May 2016 to explain the sources that led to the acquiring of these flats. He said my father set up Gulf Steel Mills in Dubai which we sold in Apr 1980 for 33 million AED.
This money was used in 1999 to set up a steel mill in Jeddah and it was sold in June 2005 for 64 million Rayals. Adding in the end that "ye hain wo zaraye jin sy London k flats khareedy gaye" and all record of sale of Dubai and Jeddah factories is available
When SC took up this case and asked for all this record the answer was that no such record exists or is available and the speech was just a "political statement".
Even if we take the claims at surface value,the document presented by the accused themselves showed only 12 mil. AED were obtained from sale of Gulf Steel Mill compared to 33 mil. claimed. Later you will see that their stance then changed to 12 mil. during proceedings.
This is just one example and inconsistencies of stances and general lies in the case are countless and hence not included in this thread(might do another). Summary is, they could not prove the original story by documentary evidence.
They could not bring any document of purchase of the two companies. Faced by the inevitable, that they will never be able to defend this stance as they dont have required documentary evidence they decided to flip the story and brought in the QATARI LETTER on 5 Nov 2016.
What the letter said was that Mian Sharif invested 12 million AED (not 33) from sale of Gulf Steel Mill in Dubai in real estate business of Qatari royals. This investment was then settled in 2006 and Hussain Nawaz was given the flats/companies that the Qataris owned.
Notwithstanding how the letter has no conclusive evidence rather just hearsay "I was informed" "I understand" "I can recall", the important part is how they kept defending the Dubai-Jeddah-London story for 6 months and then suddenly switched to Dubai-Doha-London.
Even with this switch, no documentary evidence could be brought to corroborate the new story. For example, the Qatari story is based on the 12 million investment by selling 25% shared of Gulf Steel Mill in Dubai. Through an MLA with the UAE govt. All aspects of this transaction
Were proven as false. Neither the record for sale of 25% shares, transaction of 12 mil. AED exists nor the record of the notarization of the document. Thus, with Qatari letter having being proven a myth, there was nothing left in the case for Sharifs
Returning now to the start (and a matter involving a more recent issue). The Panama papers had said that Maryam Nawaz is beneficial owner. Hussain Nawaz and consequently the Sharif family said Hussain was the beneficial owner and Maryam was just a trustee.
This was verified by the JIT through an MLA with authorities of British Virgin Island inquirinh who is the beneficial owner of Nielson and Nescol. The reply was it is Maryam Nawaz. Further that there is no trust associated with the comapnies
This is completely opposite to stance taken by Sharif family by sharing this trust deed. The MLA from BVI should be conclusive evidence about the trust deed being forged and hence falsification of evidence (having a punishment of 5 years).
However, there are many other reasons why the trust deed is clearly fake 1) The famous Calibri font. The font became commercially available on 31st Jan 2007 but the trust deed was in this font and is dated 2006. 2) For a trustee, according to UK law, a transfer of bearer shares
Needs to take place for a trust to be executed. Maryam Nawaz had maintained that she never had the bearer shares. 3) If Hussain was indeed beneficial owner, he could easily provide document attesting this which he didnt From these it is a foregone conclusion that the trust deed
Was indeed fake. Moreover, if it is established that Maryam is indeed the beneficial owner, the whole "money trail" (or a mockery thereof) that establishes Hussain Nawaz as beneficial owners gets shattered, Qatari letter gets proven to be a farce.
There is much more incriminating evidence that one finds in the case. Some very interesting remarks by the IHC but with the detailed judgement of yet to come, we can explore what reasons are given for the purported justice and are they valid later.
However, leaving with an interesting fact that the ownership of the companies has been alleged on the Sharif family since the 1990s. In 1999, when Hassan Nawaz was questioned about it, he said he didnt know about the owner but the rent comes from Pakistan.
Know who owns it and says rent comes from Pakistan. On the other hand Kulsoom Nawaz in an interview to Guardian admitted it was theirs.
There is much evidence that the flats were indeed in the ownership of the Sharif family even in the 1990s.
