Pakistan: Article 62 — a law that Nawaz's party had defended becomes his undoing

As long as the said provisions were a part of the Constitution, the courts are obliged not only to decide matters according to the same but also to enforce them whenever called upon to do so.

Times of Ahmad | News Watch | UK Desk
Source/Credit: The Express Tribune
By News Desk | July 28, 2017

The 7,000-plus-word verdict of the Supreme Court issued on Friday disqualifying Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif all comes down to this part of the judgement:

“It has not been denied that respondent No. 1 being Chairman of the Board of Capital FZE was entitled to salary, therefore, the statement that he did not withdraw the salary would not prevent the un-withdrawn salary from being receivable, hence an asset. When the un-withdrawn salary as being receivable is an asset it was required to be disclosed by respondent No. 1 in his nomination papers for the Elections of 2013 in terms of Section 12(2)(f) of the ROPA. Where respondent No. 1 did not disclose his aforesaid assets, it would amount to furnishing a false declaration on solemn affirmation in violation of the law mentioned above, therefore, he is not honest in terms of Section 99(1)(f) of the ROPA and Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Read more

Complements: The Times of Ahmad

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: