Zardari challenges Pakistan SC order seeking asset details

The Pakistan Peoples Party co-chairman on Tuesday argued that such details had nothing to do with the case and that it was out of context and against his fundamental rights, the Dawn reported.

The Supreme Court while hearing a case on the recovery of losses incurred because of the controversial National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) on August 29 had asked Zardari to submit an affidavit highlighting details of foreign assets and bank accounts, including Swiss accounts, belonging to him, his slain wife, children (Bilawal, Bakhtawar and Aseefa Bhutto-Zardari) and other dependants.

The NRO was promulgated in October 2007 by the government of the then president Pervez Musharraf. Under the ordinance, cases against politicians were removed, paving the way for many of their return to country.

The case was filed by Lawyers Foundation for Justice president Feroz Shah Gilani, seeking recovery of public amount allegedly wasted against the backdrop of the NRO in 2007.

He nominated Zardari, Musharraf and former attorney general Malik Abdul Qayyum as respondents in the case.

Zardari, 63, argued that the August 29 order had "erroneously" shifted the burden of proof to him, asking him to prove his innocence.

The actual burden of proof, the review petition argues, remains on the party which has brought the case before the court.

The order prime facie aimed at seeking to gather information which would somehow incriminate Zardari, it added. This is against the spirit of Article 13 of the Constitution which provides protection against double punishment.

Zardari has argued that the order failed to take into account the practical difficulties that would occur in attempting to gather information required to be furnished in the affidavit sought under the order.

"The record is likely to have been shredded and no longer available, especially when it comes to old property documents and details of their sale and purchase price," it said.

He said the order is also in violation of Article 4, 175 (2) and 187 (1) of the constitution which guarantees rights of individuals to be dealt with in accordance with the law, establishment and jurisdiction of the courts and issue and execution of processes of the Supreme Court, respectively.