Finance minister Ishaq Dar, in a review petition filed in the Supreme Court (SC) on Monday, challenged the court's verdict on the Panama Papers case, claiming that a reference against him cannot be filed based on a "spurious JIT (joint investigation team) report".

Dar has filed the petition just one day before the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) summoned him to appear before investigators for a probe into his assets and funds.

According to the petition filed, the ruling passed by the SC on April 20 did not give the JIT any grounds to investigate the petitioner's (Dar) assets. He claims that the investigation team "self-evidently exceeded its mandate by opining on whether or not the petitioner's assets were disproportionate to his known income".

In the petition, Dar admits that his assets did increase between the years 2008-09, however he insisted that the rise was due to six years of foreign income. He also states that the record of the income was presented to the JIT.

Dar insists that while his assets did increase from Rs9mn to Rs831mn during 1993 to 2009, "it is a moot point whether a period of 16 years can be considered a short period of time" to assess the growth in his wealth. He adds that the court had failed to take into account that the worth of the petitioner's assets had reduced by Rs544mn in the next seven years, including the time when he was finance minister.

In the petition, Dar also pointed out that he had submitted the records of his wealth and income statements from 1983-2016 which were accepted by tax authorities.

Raising objections over the damning SC ruling on the Panama Papers case, he asked how five judges could pass a verdict on the case when only three oversaw the JIT's proceedings.

He also claimed that it would be a violation of his basic rights if references against him were filed without taking his reservations into account.

Dar also raised objections over the appointment of a monitoring judge to oversee the proceedings of references filed in the National Accountability Bureau, saying that it makes the SC an unofficial petitioner and will affect the proceedings of the case.

He claimed that both, the July 28 verdict and the appointment of a monitoring judge, are a violation of Articles 175 and 203.

The SC had ordered NAB to open references against Dar and former premier Nawaz Sharif's family in its verdict on Panama Papers case.

On August 15, Sharif too had filed three separate petitions in the SC to review and stay further implementation of the Panamagate verdict.

Opinion

Editorial

Fixing bond markets
Updated 01 Oct, 2026

Fixing bond markets

Pension funds, insurance companies, mutual funds, retail investors, and eventually, foreign investors must become bigger participants in the market.
Call centre rackets
01 Oct, 2026

Call centre rackets

A NUMBER of recent raids conducted by the authorities in different cities point to the growing threat fraudulent ...
Homeward bound
01 Oct, 2026

Homeward bound

FIVE months after Somali pirates captured an oil tanker carrying a 19-member multinational crew, Somali maritime...
Kashmir unresolved
Updated 30 Sep, 2026

Kashmir unresolved

The just solution lies in India addressing the issue through a trilateral dialogue involving the legitimate representatives of the Kashmiri people and Pakistan.
Water shortage
30 Sep, 2026

Water shortage

THAT the country is entering the Rabi season with an anticipated water shortage of nearly 25pc, the lowest carryover...
Young hearts
30 Sep, 2026

Young hearts

THE observance may have passed, but the message of World Heart Day should not fade with it. The occasion is a useful...