Maryam Nawaz inquires whether to contest election for National Assembly

[kkppmc]

Hope and shit both float. Its surprising how much faith they have in the judiciary right up to the point they get knocked down. Then its all the "jurnails" doing.

I've been hearing this optimism ever since the panama papers scandal broke and every step and stage of the way they said, oh now he is going to be acquitted, oh now the case is totally in his favour, oh now khaja harris destroyed the prosecution etc etc etc. And this time its not going to be any different. There is no new evidence to argue that the conviction was wrong, no evidence or money trail was provided, Nawaz Darbaris inJustice Athers made up his own creteria and argument ( against the law as stated earlier ) just to give relief to his master

I don't blame you because this is the only sliver of hope you have left to hang on to. And if you let reality come in the way you have nothing left to look forward to.

Oh and if you don't agree with me on Maryum not being able to contest any elections please provide a argument that can prove that she can. Because according to law as I have stated with reference there is no way, Just by wishing she can, doesn't make it so.

There is nothing in the case .You cannot convict somebody based upon assumptions and presumptions at the behest of establishment. Judges in the higher courts are not that blind that they keep convict somebody without any hard proof and even in the case where not only the owner of the apartment is established but no corruption /Kickbacks on any project or misuse of power in surfaced. 300 billion money laundering that the puppet PM keep repeating , there is no sign of it. The "selected" PM is the king of liars. I can tell you higher courts will not write the verdicts based upon assumptions.

I know you are in a state of denial ,but hope you and me can live a little longer so that we can see the conclusion of these fake cases with our own eyes.
As I mentioned before, my argument of Mariam can contest the election was based upon the lawyers opinion, which include Babar Sattar, Irfan qadir, and Ali Ahmed Kurd and that's what I echo it here .

There was a situation at that time (2 years ago) as establishment don't want him to be returned so they have to come up with a weak decision of not mentioning the " non receivable salary" in the nomination paper as per the black law dictionary. Who gave the verdict like this? The verdict should decide on the basis of Pakistan tax laws in which the definition of asset is described not on the basis of the the black law dictionary.
On the other hand in the "puppet" PM case in which he did not declare "Niazi Services" in the nomination paper which was his asset until 2015. Saqib Nisar give him the favor there .
You cannot have two different decision for the same thing .

 

[Citizen X]

There is nothing in the case .You cannot convict somebody based upon assumptions and presumptions at the behest of establishment. Judges in the higher courts are not that blind that they keep convict somebody without any hard proof and even in the case where not only the owner of the apartment is established

I'll tell you what I kept telling another delusional patwari for 2 years who kept arguing the same non-sense you are now. This assumption, that assumption, khwaja harris did this court today, Zia did that in court today blah blah blah blah.

The case was and is a simple open and shut case. The properties are yours ? Yes. Ok then provide proof of how you paid for them and how that money was earned and transferred out of the country. Plain and simple, no two ways about it.

Once it was admitted the properties are theirs the burden of proof was and IS solely on the Sharifs. Not the other way round. Prosecution does not have to argue anything. The Prosecution could have slept through the entire trial and won.

NAB law, listed under corrupt practices Section 9/5

9 (a) A holder of a public office, or any other person, is said to commit or to have committed the offence of corruption and corrupt practices-

if he or any of his dependents or benamidar owns, possesses, or has 4 [acquired] right or title in any 5 [“assets or holds irrevocable power of attorney in respect of any assets] or PAGE 13 pecuniary resources disproportionate to his known sources of income, which he cannot 1 [reasonably] account for 2 [or maintains a standard of living beyond that which is commensurate with his sources of income]

https://www.sbp.org.pk/l_frame/NAB_Ord_1999.pdf

And even if you read the detailed verdict of InJustice Ather Min Darbari its also arguing the same fact as you, that's probably where you patwaris get it from. That prosecution didn't prove this, that etc etc etc. Which even a layman knows has no relevance to the case.

FYI in an appeal hearing a ruling can only be overturned if some new evidence that could have impacted the verdict has been uncovered or the defense can with prove with previous solid legal precedent that the trail or verdict was flawed and against the law or constitution. And since none of that has happened or any new evidence can come to surface ( i.e the sharifs money trail ) appeal will be dismissed, AT BEST if Khaja Harris at the last minute crys and pleads enough like he did last time and got 6 weeks bail, a reduction of sentence might be possible. Maybe if the appeal is dismissed this might be their next step.

Also not in your favour, a verdict is rarely ever overturned in an appeals hearing. Very few and far in between cases this has happened.

Thats why I said I admire your optimism against such great odds, but now I'm starting to understand this optimism is not due to some bravery but rather a failure to understand facts and sipping patwari Kool AId which gives you all false hope.

I know you are in a state of denial ,but hope you and me can live a little longer so that we can see the conclusion of these fake cases with our own eyes.

Only problem is when as expected the verdicts don't come in your favour you patwaris run away or start crying khalai makhlooq khalai makhlooq Army this army that blah blah, not like you are every going to admit your ganjas are corrupt to the core. Even if angels from heavens descended and testified , hell even if ganja himself admits it, you people wont.

As I mentioned before, my argument of Mariam can contest the election was based upon the lawyers opinion, which include Babar Sattar, Irfan qadir, and Ali Ahmed Kurd and that's what I echo it here .

Mind sharing what that great opinion of lawyers like Kali Sundi aka Ali Kurd aka know ganja tattoo were where they somehow went over the law and made her eligible again ?

There was a situation at that time (2 years ago) as establishment don't want him to be returned so they have to come up with a weak decision of not mentioning the " non receivable salary" in the nomination paper as per the black law dictionary. Who gave the verdict like this? The verdict should decide on the basis of Pakistan tax laws in which the definition of asset is described not on the basis of the the black law dictionary.
On the other hand in the "puppet" PM case in which he did not declare "Niazi Services" in the nomination paper which was his asset until 2015. Saqib Nisar give him the favor there .
You cannot have two different decision for the same thing .

The usual irrelevant patwari crying, not worth addressing. This happened that happened.

 

[kkppmc]

[

I'll tell you what I kept telling another delusional patwari for 2 years who kept arguing the same non-sense you are now. This assumption, that assumption, khwaja harris did this court today, Zia did that in court today blah blah blah blah.

The case was and is a simple open and shut case. The properties are yours ? Yes. Ok then provide proof of how you paid for them and how that money was earned and transferred out of the country. Plain and simple, no two ways about it.

Once it was admitted the properties are theirs the burden of proof was and IS solely on the Sharifs. Not the other way round. Prosecution does not have to argue anything. The Prosecution could have slept through the entire trial and won.

NAB law, listed under corrupt practices Section 9/5


https://www.sbp.org.pk/l_frame/NAB_Ord_1999.pdf

And even if you read the detailed verdict of InJustice Ather Min Darbari its also arguing the same fact as you, that's probably where you patwaris get it from. That prosecution didn't prove this, that etc etc etc. Which even a layman knows has no relevance to the case.

FYI in an appeal hearing a ruling can only be overturned if some new evidence that could have impacted the verdict has been uncovered or the defense can with prove with previous solid legal precedent that the trail or verdict was flawed and against the law or constitution. And since none of that has happened or any new evidence can come to surface ( i.e the sharifs money trail ) appeal will be dismissed, AT BEST if Khaja Harris at the last minute crys and pleads enough like he did last time and got 6 weeks bail, a reduction of sentence might be possible. Maybe if the appeal is dismissed this might be their next step.

Also not in your favour, a verdict is rarely ever overturned in an appeals hearing. Very few and far in between cases this has happened.

Thats why I said I admire your optimism against such great odds, but now I'm starting to understand this optimism is not due to some bravery but rather a failure to understand facts and sipping patwari Kool AId which gives you all false hope.


Only problem is when as expected the verdicts don't come in your favour you patwaris run away or start crying khalai makhlooq khalai makhlooq Army this army that blah blah, not like you are every going to admit your ganjas are corrupt to the core. Even if angels from heavens descended and testified , hell even if ganja himself admits it, you people wont.



Mind sharing what that great opinion of lawyers like Kali Sundi aka Ali Kurd aka know ganja tattoo were where they somehow went over the law and made her eligible again ?



The usual irrelevant patwari crying, not worth addressing. This happened that happened.

Now I really start to doubt about your intellectual disability . Here you mentioned that this open and shut case once they say the property is theirs and they have to provide the money trail . Please enlighten me where NS said that the apartment is on his name ? If the apartment is not on his name and if no documentary evidence that indicate that he bought the apartment in 1993 then how can you convict the person based upon assumptions. The apartment is on Hussain Nawaz name and he is answerable for the money trail . I know you have some intellectual limitations but it not that hard to understand.

It look like Fawad Chaudary brother is your lawyer as you don't even know that the appeals in high court, the case will be open in detail and every single information is analyzed again and it goes on and on .It is like a second trial . In supreme court the scope is limited and they just review it in couple of sessions if there is any new information or sufficient evidence is there to overturn the verdict. Also for your kind information , NAB conviction in high court is overturned by 85%. I repeat 85% . I don't know what is the source of information.

Due to you your intellectual limitation, I know it is still difficult for you to understand so wait for the decision on the appeals and you will get the answer.

 

[Citizen X]

[

Now I really start to doubt about your intellectual disability . Here you mentioned that this open and shut case once they say the property is theirs and they have to provide the money trail . Please enlighten me where NS said that the apartment is on his name ? If the apartment is not on his name and if no documentary evidence that indicate that he bought the apartment in 1993 then how can you convict the person based upon assumptions. The apartment is on Hussain Nawaz name and he is answerable for the money trail . I know you have some intellectual limitations but it not that hard to understand.

It look like Fawad Chaudary brother is your lawyer as you don't even know that the appeals in high court, the case will be open in detail and every single information is analyzed again and it goes on and on .It is like a second trial . In supreme court the scope is limited and they just review it in couple of sessions if there is any new information or sufficient evidence is there to overturn the verdict. Also for your kind information , NAB conviction in high court is overturned by 85%. I repeat 85% . I don't know what is the source of information.

Due to you your intellectual limitation, I know it is still difficult for you to understand so wait for the decision on the appeals and you will get the answer.

If you have English comprehension problems then its not my problem, read the law again which I gave reference too earlier. Here it is again with the relevant part highlighted.

"9 (a) A holder of a public office, or any other person, is said to commit or to have committed the offence of corruption and corrupt practices-

if he or any of his dependents or benamidar owns, possesses, or has 4 [acquired] right or title in any 5 [“assets or holds irrevocable power of attorney in respect of any assets] or PAGE 13 pecuniary resources disproportionate to his known sources of income, which he cannot 1 [reasonably] account for 2 [or maintains a standard of living beyond that which is commensurate with his sources of income]"

Benamidars or dependents i.e Babloo, dabloo and Maryam.

 

[Citizen X]

It look like Fawad Chaudary brother is your lawyer as you don't even know that the appeals in high court, the case will be open in detail and every single information is analyzed again and it goes on and on .It is like a second trial

Yeah thats what you think. Appeals in any court is to give a chance to the defense to point out any flaws or errors, if any in the original trial and verdict or as I mentioned before if any new evidence has come forth. What gave you the impression that its whole another trial, you wish but it isn't the case.

 

[kkppmc]

If you have English comprehension problems then its not my problem, read the law again which I gave reference too earlier. Here it is again with the relevant part highlighted.

"9 (a) A holder of a public office, or any other person, is said to commit or to have committed the offence of corruption and corrupt practices-

if he or any of his dependents or benamidar owns, possesses, or has 4 [acquired] right or title in any 5 [“assets or holds irrevocable power of attorney in respect of any assets] or PAGE 13 pecuniary resources disproportionate to his known sources of income, which he cannot 1 [reasonably] account for 2 [or maintains a standard of living beyond that which is commensurate with his sources of income]"

Benamidars or dependents i.e Babloo, dabloo and Maryam.

Yeah thats what you think. Appeals in any court is to give a chance to the defense to point out any flaws or errors, if any in the original trial and verdict or as I mentioned before if any new evidence has come forth. What gave you the impression that its whole another trial, you wish but it isn't the case.

Ok let see what happened in the appeal. The law u are quoting here is specifically confined to accountability court and during the appeal process there are more rules and law that requires to be look into . That why the Nab conviction is overturned 85 % of the time.

 

[Citizen X]

The law u are quoting here is specifically confined to accountability court and during the appeal process there are more rules and law that requires to be look into

That why the Nab conviction is overturned 85 % of the time.

Care to back these statements up with some proof or also just one of those things you heard someone say?

Oh and another patwari also said the same, Oh we will see, I am here and you are here. Problem is he ran away, and a few others started crying oh this happened, that happened. blah blah blah.

 

[kkppmc]

Care to back these statements up with some proof or also just one of those things you heard someone say?

I don't have time to look into this but it was arshad sharif in one of the program share the whole data in this regard along with rauf klasara

 

[Citizen X]

I don't have time to look into this but it was arshad sharif in one of the program share the whole data in this regard along with rauf klasara

So again no solid proof just something you heard someone say once, starting to sound like the famous qatari khat.

 

[kkppmc]

So again no solid proof just something you heard someone say once, starting to sound like the famous qatari khat.

Ok then you can come with solid proof to back ur claim that there is 0,01 % chance that NAB verdict cannot be overturn in high court. Please share ur source. I already quote the source from where I heard.