LAHORE: A Pakistani court on Friday rejected a plea by former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif that his bail on medical grounds be extended and also refused to allow him to go to the United Kingdom for treatment.
The three-time premier will now go back to prison on May 7, when his bail expires.
On March 26, the Supreme Court agreed to release the jailed leader of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PMLN) party on bail for six weeks to receive medical treatment but said he would not be allowed to leave the country.
On Friday, Sharif’s counsel Khawaja Haris Ahmed pleaded that his bail be extended by eight weeks on medical grounds but the court said in a short order that Sharif had been granted six weeks bail for treatment but it seemed he had spent the entire time getting medical tests done.
An angiography needs an hour whereas the court had granted six weeks, Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa remarked during the proceedings.
Sharif is serving a seven-year sentence imposed last year for failing to reveal the source of income that allowed him to set up Al-Azizia Steel Mills in Saudi Arabia. He has appealed the sentence.
PMLN Chairman Raja Zafrul Haq said the court’s rejection of the bail extension would not change much for the party as legislators elected on PMLN tickets and supporters remained committed to the party and Sharif.
“The decision will not down the morale of party workers as they have full confidence in the leadership of Nawaz Sharif,” Haq said. “Neither a legislator nor a worker has changed his or her loyalty. The High Court will hear the case on May 9 and we are hopeful in getting relief from there.”
“The jail term of a prisoner only restricts his freedom of movement and does not end other fundamental rights,” Ashtar Ausaf Ali, former Attorney General for Pakistan, told Arab News, frowning upon the court’s decision not to extend the ex-PM’s bail.
Veteran journalist and longtime political observer Nusrat Javed said the rejection of Sharif’s plea by the Supreme Court would demoralize PMLN workers.
“The party will suffer for the time being as it will bring a sense of depression among the party leadership and workers,” he said.
In July 2017, the Supreme Court removed Sharif from office for not disclosing part of a salary drawn from his son’s company. He was later convicted in two separate cases of failing to disclose sources of income. In one of these cases revolving the ownership of upscale London properties, the high court suspended a 10-year sentence and granted bail last September until a final decision was made on his appeal application against the conviction. The appeal process in both cases is continuing.
Sharif says all charges against him are politically motivated and has accused the Pakistani military and courts of working together to end his political career and cut his political party down to size. Both the military and the courts deny the accusations.
In July last year, Sharif’s PML-N party lost to the Tehreek-i-Insaf party of cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan, who is now the prime minister. Sharif’s party has said the elections were rigged in favor of Khan, which Khan and his party deny.
Pakistan’s ex-PM Sharif to head back to jail as court rejects bail extension
Pakistan’s ex-PM Sharif to head back to jail as court rejects bail extension
- Refuses to allow the three-time premier to go to the United Kingdom for treatment
- Sharif aides say court’s decision changes nothing as party workers, legislators remain committed to their leader
Pakistan accuses India of manipulating Indus waters, warns of risks to regional peace
- India announced in April it was putting the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance over a gun attack in disputed Kashmir it blamed on Pakistan
- Islamabad says it has witnessed ‘unusual, abrupt variations’ in the flow of Chenab river, accusing New Delhi of ‘material breaches’ of treaty
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan on Friday accused India of manipulating flows of Indus waters in violation of a 1960 water-sharing treaty, warning that unilateral actions over the transboundary waters could heighten tensions and pose risks to regional peace.
The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), mediated by the World Bank, divides control of the Indus basin rivers between the two nuclear-armed neighbors. India said in April it was holding the treaty “in abeyance” after a gun attack in Indian-administered Kashmir killed more than 26 tourists. New Delhi blamed the assault on Pakistan, Islamabad denied it.
The treaty grants Pakistan rights to the Indus basin’s western rivers — Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab — for irrigation, drinking, and non-consumptive uses like hydropower, while India controls the eastern rivers — Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej — for unrestricted use but must not significantly alter their flow. India can use the western rivers for limited purposes such as power generation and irrigation, without storing or diverting large volumes, according to the agreement.
Speaking to foreign envoys in Islamabad, Pakistani Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar accused New Delhi of “material breaches” of the IWT that may have consequences for regional stability, citing “unusual, abrupt variations” in the flow of Chenab river from April 30 to May 21 and from Dec. 7 to Dec. 15.
“These variations in water flows are of extreme concern for Pakistan as they point to unilateral release of water by India into River Chenab. India has released this water without any prior notification or any data- or information-sharing with Pakistan as required under the treaty,” he said.
“India’s most recent action clearly exemplifies the weaponization of water to which Pakistan has been consistently drawing attention of the international community.”
There was no immediate response from New Delhi to the statement.
Dar said this water “manipulation” occurs at a critical time in Pakistan’s agricultural cycle and directly threatens the lives and livelihoods as well as food and economic security of its citizens.
He shared that Indian actions prompted Indus Water Commissioner Mehar Ali Shah to write a letter to his Indian counterpart, seeking clarification on the matter as provided under the Indus Waters Treaty.
“We expect India to respond to the queries raised by Pakistan’s Indus water commissioner, refrain from any unilateral manipulation of river flows, and fulfill all its obligations in letter and spirit under the Indus Waters Treaty provisions,” the Pakistani deputy premier said.
Dar also accused India of consistently trying to undermine the IWT by building various dams, including Kishenganga and Ratle hydropower projects, which he said sets “a very dangerous precedent.”
“Alarmingly, India is now subverting the treaty’s own dispute resolution mechanism by refusing to participate in the Court of Arbitration and neutral expert proceedings. India is pursuing a deliberate strategy to sabotage the well-established arbitration process under the treaty provisions,” he said.
The South Asian neighbors have been arguing over hydroelectric projects on the shared Indus river system for decades, with Pakistan complaining that India’s planned hydropower dams will cut its flows.
In August, the International Court of Arbitration rendered an award on issues of general interpretation of the IWT, explaining the designed criteria for the new run-of-river hydropower projects to be constructed by India on the western rivers of Chenab, Jhelum and Indus, which Islamabad said vindicated its stance.
In its findings, the Court of Arbitration declared that India shall “let flow” the waters of the western rivers for Pakistan’s unrestricted use. In that connection, the specified exceptions for generation of hydro-electric plants must conform strictly to the requirements laid down in the Treaty, rather than to what India might consider an “ideal” or “best practices approach,” according to the Pakistani foreign office.
“Pakistan would like to reiterate that Indus Waters Treaty is a binding legal instrument that has made an invaluable contribution to peace and stability of South Asia,” Dar said.
“Its violation, on the one hand, threatens the inviolability of international treaties and on the other, it poses serious risks to regional peace and security, principles of good neighborhood, and norms that govern inter-state relations.”
