Can't say for certain. Let's just say there is a high probability of outside interest involvement considering all players and nation states affected by the removal of Nawaz Sharif
I used the term soft coup. Was it a soft coup? I would say so.
Soft Coup definitionLink
Soft coups include actions of senior government or military officials refusing to carry out their roles in critical tasks, or otherwise acting in opposition to the letter or spirit of the law to diminish or remove de facto power from those who would otherwise legally wield it.
No Prime Minister in Pakistan’s 70-year history has served his or her full term. Friday’s decision by Pakistan’s supreme court to disqualify Nawaz Sharif upheld this grim tradition. Mr. Sharif, who stepped down as Pakistan’s Prime Minister on Friday, was hobbled by allegations of corruption ever since the Panama Papers leak in 2015 revealed his family’s ownership of at least three shell companies registered in the British Virgin Islands, a seeming involvement in deals worth US$25 million (AED92 million) and an expensive property portfolio in central London.
The revelations sparked off frenzied protests (we’ll read about those a bit more, shortly) against Mr. Sharif and inaugurated a judicial inquiry into his family’s finances. The findings of the judicial investigation, carried out over a three-month period and published earlier this month, were damning even though their credibility was undermined by the fact that two of the authors of the report were also members of Pakistan’s powerful military intelligence agencies.No trial. Not found guilty. Yet, forced out. Sure reads like a soft coup! It’s interesting to consider the reality of his removal was not really tied to his governing of Pakistan. And going by all my reading he wasn’t found guilty of anything nefarious either
"Mr. Sharif was not afforded a trial nor, strictly speaking, was he found guilty of corruption. Rather, the supreme court declared him ineligible for office because it took the view that, in failing to disclose his assets, Mr Sharif had contravened the constitutional requirement for legislators to be 'sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest and truthful'," the newspaper continued.
"The Pakistani judiciary’s ability to truncate an elected prime minister’s time in office can be seen as an affirmation of constitutional democracy: the supreme court ruled on the constitutionality of the prime minister’s conduct, Mr. Sharif complied with its decision and quit, and Pakistan moved on.
"Such a view is comforting," the editorial said, "but it is also misleading. Mr. Sharif’s abrupt departure is bad news for Pakistan and for the region. Given its history of coups and ramshackle civilian governments, Pakistan desperately needs to establish a precedent of an uninterrupted full term in office by a democratically elected Prime Minister.
"It certainly does not augur well for Pakistan’s economy, which, having run up an unprecedented current account deficit of $32.6 billion last year, is at a critical juncture with the central bank attempting to manage the over-valued rupee.India demoralised. Pakistan wobbly. Central bank attempting to manage an overvalued rupee?
"Pakistan’s relationship with India is another potential casualty. Although on the Pakistani right, Mr. Sharif was heavily invested in securing peace with India. Despite the deterioration of ties between Delhi and Islamabad, Mr. Sharif’s presence was a source of assurance. India cannot but feel demoralised by this development.
To say nothing of Afghanistan. Kashmir. And then, of course, the potential balkanization of Pakistan. Baluchistan..... ?
Soft Coup: Why Pakistan's Army WANTED Naraz Sharif OUT & here's what may happen
There is a widespread impression that Nawaz Sharif was removed from office by Pakistan's Supreme Court on the basis of evidence that he and members of his family illegally possessed huge unaccounted financial assets and properties in London and elsewhere.
The Supreme Court, however, removed Sharif from office exclusively on the basis of evidence provided by the JIT that he did not declare an amount of UAE Dirhams 10,000 (equivalent to Rs 1.7 Lakh) he received from a UAE Company, while filing his nomination papers for elections in 2013.
The Supreme Court used convoluted arguments, which have been questioned even by eminent Pakistani lawyers, to justify its decision. The court held that even though Sharif never received this money, he was bound to declare it as a "receivable"
The army reacted strongly. It sought and secured the sacking of Sharif's personal foreign policy adviser Tareq Fatemi for leaking information about these differences. Ensuring that Sharif does not return to power will be high on the army's agenda, which the judiciary evidently shares.
The army will seek to split Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League Party through its links with senior leaders like interior minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan. While Shahbaz Sharif has maintained a closer relationship with army generals than his elder brother Nawaz, the ISI will spare no effort to discredit and marginalise Nawaz.
Moreover, in a situation where the main opposition Party, the PPP, is organizationally weak in even its strongholds in Sind and Southern Punjab, the mercurial and virulently anti-Indian Imran Khan, who has been a protege of the army, could emerge stronger than he is now.Imran Khan- we'll be learning more about him- he's certainly been delivered the goods on a silver platter-
Sharif, whom the Pakistan Supreme Court on Friday ousted in a blatant act of judicial activism, understood that only a stronger economy and semblance of peace at the border will give him the political legitimacy needed to stay in power for five years — a feat no other Pakistani prime minister has achieved.
Under him, the economy was showing promising signs. He improved fiscal discipline, reduced poverty, put money in middle class's hands, and the stock market responded with enthusiasm. On 15 May, 2017, index provider MSCI announced that it was reclassifying Pakistan's status from lowly 'frontier' to more prestigious 'emerging market'.
One may assume that these positive changes would have strengthened Sharif's political hold and gave greater legitimacy to the civilian government. Surely the electorate would welcome these developments? They did, and that's the problem. Nawaz's Pakistan Muslim League (N) remain hugely popular in the influential Punjab province and the prime minister had total control over his party. Imran Khan was sniping at his heels but he wasn't a political heavyweight.
Historically, Pakistan's army and the Deep State have felt insecure during even brief interludes of civilian authority. They see Banquo's apparition in a popular prime minister. This arises out of their necessity to keep rent-seeking opportunities intact. For the army and Pakistan's intelligence establishment, animus against India and Afghanistan translate into massive pecuniary and political benefits.
Sharif, who wanted to normalise democracy and solidify grip over power, made two cardinal errors. He responded to Modi's outreaches (swearing-in ceremony, Lahore stopover) and sought to limit the influence wielded by the security-intelligence network.
It’s claimed aka widely spun the Panama Papers were the reason behind the removal.
As mentioned, but worth restating. Nothing to do with Panama papers.
"Sharif and his children were facing probe triggered by the Panama Papers investigation, which put forth four apartments in London that they own through two offshore companies. His disqualification has, however, happened for a charge unrelated to this: For not declaring income as the Chairman of Dubai-based Capital FZE, which dissolved in 2014"
Income it seems Sharif may not have been paid? Recall?
"The court held that even though Sharif never received this money, he was bound to declare it as a "receivable"
"This controversial decision has raised many questions about the future of democracy and how an elected Prime Minister can easily be sent home without getting an opportunity to defend his position on the particular point"
Does this move expose the state of relationship between the courts and the executive in Pakistan? The deep state in other words:
" Politicians often complain of being decorated with official titles but deprived of power. They will have to strengthen themselves through caliber and character. Rights are earned, they aren’t granted"
What will be political impact of Sharif’s exit?
"Sharif is a popular leader. Whether his exit is for good remains to be seen. He will file a petition seeking review of the verdict. Let’s hope the court realizes this fact too. Else, the disqualification of a popular leader on a petty matter will haunt the court for years to come."And then there is Imran Khan. He’s interesting and obviously corrupt.
There are familiar themes about him, his charities/ foundations and his ties to the military.
Pakistan's military being intimately tied to the US military industrial complex.
"Will this change or rather enhance the significance of Tehreek-e-Insaf Chairman Imran Khan in Pakistan, who was one of the petitioners in the case?"A bit self serving, no?
"Imran has channelized the anger of disaffected population; youth in particular."
New York Times did a big article on Imran Khan
"For Mr. Khan, 64, the moment was sweet. He had been the main petitioner before the court and fomented widespread street protests against Mr. Sharif, emerging as the strongest challenger to the former prime minister and his political legacy."Khan- Protege of the army. Main Petitioner to oust Sharif. And 'widespread street protests" Aka Gene Sharp and colour revolutions.
Snowflakes and social media....A toxic combination
"But Mr. Khan’s path to victory in the next general election, set for mid-2018, is far from assured, according to analysts, including Moeed Yusuf, associate vice president of the Asia Center at the United States Institute of Peace, whose research and work centers on Pakistan.
Not until 2011 did Mr. Khan find himself center stage as he captured the public’s imagination and began drawing hundreds of thousands of Pakistanis to his political rallies. Most people in the audiences were educated, urban youths, disgruntled with the system and energized by Mr. Khan’s populist, anticorruption and anti-American message. The party also picked up vast support among the Pakistani expatriate community, and Mr. Khan’s supporters are dominant on social media."
"The country’s powerful generals might be reluctant to see Mr. Khan in power. Critics dismiss him as soft on militancy; some even ridicule him with the nickname “Taliban Khan.”"Might be or might not be? Or does the NYT's just wish us to think of this guy as an outsider. He does not seem to be an outsider
"Mr. Khan has no experience with governing and has shown an aptitude more for street agitation than working with Parliament to bring about change.
“Enamored supporters say Mr. Khan is not corrupt like traditional politicians and point to his philanthropic work as proof that he will do more good for the country”
He’s not corrupt like traditional politicians? So he’s corrupt in some different fashion then?
Because just my short time researching him demonstrates Mr Khan is corrupt and has some very serious, serious, corruption issues.
"Mr. Khan too faces cases against him in the Supreme Court and the election commission, stemming from accusations of hiding assets and of foreign funding of his political party.Mr Khan has funneled money from one of his many foundation/charities to his political party. He may not have held public office at that time, but....... Think of the corrupt Clinton foundation
“How can I be disqualified?” he said in an interview. “I was never a public officeholder"
"The IRS was notified that the relationship of the Donor to the Donee was “NONE,” despite the fact that each of the grants were made to funds in Pakistan founded by Imran Khan and/or controlled by his political party, reveals AP investigation.
AP found out some not-so-transparent dealings by the United States’ branch of Imran Khan Foundation in the way they distributed your money which was collected as Flood Relief donations.
The Imran Khan Foundation (IKF) is a nonprofit corporation showing an address of 385 S Lemon Ave, Walnut CA 91789. IKF is a registered tax-exempt public charity under section 501 (c)(3) of the United States’ Internal Revenue Service Code. As such, contributions to the Imran Khan Foundation are tax deductible. Interestingly, the Board of Directors of the IKF are also close aides to Imran Khan’s political party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI)."
"AP investigation team obtained various documents from Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of the US Treasury Department. The IRS form 990 for the Imran Khan Foundation from 2007-2014 were carefully evaluated. IRS Form 990 are all public documents per IRS code and they are required to be filed by each non-profit organization on a yearly basis. These documents can also be obtained from a publicly accessible database on the US Treasury Department.
The Mission Statement of IKF is very ambitious and ” its principal goal is to improve the quality of life for the unreached and underserved communities by ensuring access to basic services”.
According to the IKF’s IRS Form 990s, obtained by AP investigative team, the organization raised funds in the United States and transferred those funds to relief efforts in Pakistan. The actual destination and use of these funds, however, is not always clear. Between 2007 and 2010, IKF transferred about $187,000 to Pakistan. The reported recipients were the Mianwali Development Trust, Namal Education Foundation, Pakistan Insaf Welfare Trust, and Swat Relief Fund PTI.
For each itemized overseas grant made by IKF, the IRS was notified that the relationship of the Donor to the Donee was “NONE,” despite the fact that each of the grants were made to funds in Pakistan founded by Imran Khan and/or controlled by his political party PTI. That’s not where the ambiguity ends, In 2010, presumably in response to the historic flooding in Pakistan, IKF reported revenue totaling $5,956,654. However, only $144,851 was reported in expenditures that year. This amounts to a major discrepancy."Ya think! Revenue of nearly six million dollars but expenditures of only 144.850.00?
"In 2011, IKF reported revenues of $793,903 with expenditures of $372,858 leaving $6,240,269 cash on hand at the end of 2011. It wasn’t until 2012, that IKF made a large financial transfer, this time in the amount of $5,501,205. That distribution was reported as having been made as an unspecified cash donation in Pakistan.
This is not conclusive of anything because we do not know how the funds were actually used in Pakistan; but the timing does raise questions given that PTI was in the midst of a national political campaign when $5.5 million in tax-free charitable funds were transferred from the US to Pakistan – especially given the IKF’s history of using funds for “relief efforts” tied to a political party.
At the end of 2014, the IKF showed a net worth of 1.87 million dollars.
It is also worth mentioning that Imran Khan runs several charity organizations including but not limited to Shaukat Khanum Memorial Trust and Imran Khan Cancer Appeal, UK."Charities and foundations as a means to fund money political machinations and colour revolutions..
Imran Kahn was married to Jemima Khan nee Jemima Goldsmith.
Allegedly, they are still on very good terms having two children to contend with.
So we have some interesting big bankster connections to boot!
Bankers, military, corrupt foundations.. resources, geo strategic locales.
This soft coup has it all
From Earlier today