ISLAMABAD - Son-in-law of former premier Nawaz Sharif and PML-N leader Capt (r) Muhammad Safdar on Wednesday termed the NAB’s Avenfield reference against him a ‘price’ for his relationship with the supreme leader of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz.
He also informed the accountability court that he would not produce any witnesses in his defence because the prosecution had ‘failed to establish a case against him’.
He was recording his statement under Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) in a case related to London properties, which is one of the three references filed by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) against the Sharif family.
He had been named in the reference along with Nawaz Sharif, wife Maryam Nawaz and his brothers-in-law Hassan and Hussain Nawaz.
To a question that why the Avenfield reference case had been filed against him by the NAB, Safdar, while terming it a ‘pressure tactic’, recalled the past events starting from his joining the Pakistan Army to his posting as Nawaz's security officer.
He briefly pointed out the political developments happened in the 90s, when his father-in-law was deprived of the government twice - first in 1993 by President Ghulam Ishaq Khan and then in 1999 by army chief General Pervez Musharraf.
"Nawaz Sharif wisely saved the region from an imminent war but he could not save his own regime," Safdar said, referring to the Kargil Operation which had sparked a tiff between Nawaz and Musharraf which eventually escalated into the infamous coup.
He mentioned his political victimisation done by opponents of Nawaz Sharif, including disruption of his civil services and a first information report (FIR) registered at Lahore with Raiwind Police station, his arrest in Musharraf’s regime and subsequent exile to Saudi Arabia.
“This is the price of my relationship with Nawaz Sharif, which I ever paid, still paying and will pay,” the son-in-law of former premier expressed his strong commitment, adding: “This is my duty, I will support narrative of Nawaz Sharif.”
He claimed that the Joint Investigation Team’s (JIT) decision to include him in the references despite not being named in the Supreme Court's April 20 judgement showed that the JIT's "intentions were mala fide".
When asked to disclose the source of funds with which Maryam had bought the Avenfield apartments, he denied that Maryam was the owner of the said property.
Safdar skipped most of the questions posed to him, deeming them "irrelevant". In the end, when asked if he wanted to add something, he simply claimed to be innocent.
Following the conclusion of Safdar's testimony, the court was adjourned till June 5, when it will hear the final arguments on the Avenfield reference. However, the accountability court summoned JIT head Wajid Zia to appear on Thursday when he will be cross-questioned by Nawaz's counsel in connection with the reference concerning Al-Azizia Steel Mills.
MUHAMMAD ASAD CHAUDHRY