Accountability court likely to reserve Avenfield case verdict today


ISLAMABAD, (DNA) – An accountability court is expected to reserve its verdict in Avenfield reference against members of Sharif family today, local media reported.Nawaz Sharif and his sons Hussain and Hasan are accused in all three references – Hill Metal establishment, London flats and offshore firms –  whereas his daughter Maryam and son-in-law MNA Capt (retd) Safdar are named in the Avenfield reference only.

Nawaz’s counsel Khawja Harris has completed his concluding arguments in the London flats case, while counsel for Maryam and Safdar would end the final arguments in today’s hearing.

However, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), which had filed all the three reference against Sharifs, has reportedly decided to not file the response to the final arguments submitted by the counsels for the suspects.

The court, therefore, is likely to reserve the decision today and it would be announced on July 10, days before the general elections are set to be held and one-month deadline is going to expire.

Maryam Nawaz is going to contest polls from Lahore’s NA-127 and PP-

The accused in the case will not appear before the court as they are in London to visit the ailing Begum Kulsoom Nawaz, who has been placed on ventilator in mid June after her health deteriorated.

On Monday, the court granted a two-day exemption to former premier Nawaz Sharif and his daughter Maryam Nawaz.

The co-accused in the Avenfield reference had applied for a week’s exemption from physical appearance in the accountability court, however, the judge Muhammad Bashir did not entertain them fully.

During the course of hearing, Maryam Nawaz’ lawyer, Amjad Pervaiz resumed his final arguments and questioned the professionalism of forensic expert, Robert Radley.

He contended that during the court proceedings, only specialist’s opinion (testimony) is acceptable, however, Radley did not inform the court about his qualification as he has been working in this field since 1976.

Robert Radley did not submit his Curriculum Vitae (CV) in the court before recording his statement, he argued before the judge.

Maryam’s lawyer explained that Radley should have presented the CV in the record as it was already provided in the ‘Volume4’.

‘Identification of font’ is an expertise but Redley did not mention this skill in his CV,’ lawyer Amjad Pervez claimed.