BRITISH COURT OF APPEALS RESERVED A VERDICT ON LONDON PROPERTIES CASE OF MQM

LONDON. [UK]. APRIL 24: The appeal hearing of the MQM Properties case against the decision of the British Royal Court of Justice concluded today after the second day. The court has reserved its judgment, and a decision will be forthcoming. The three-member bench of the Court of Appeals, comprised of Lord Justice Moylan, Lord Justice Arnold, and Lord Justice Nugee, presided over the hearing.

During today's proceedings, Mr Altaf Hussain's lawyer, Barrister Richard Slade, reiterated his arguments. Slade emphasized that MQM operates within the bounds of the constitution, with the Coordination Committee serving as its central body under the leadership of Hussain.

He highlighted the challenges faced by MQM members, including targeted security operations and pressures from paramilitary establishments and ISI.

Slade referenced the 'Minus Altaf' project, which led to Hussain's removal from party leadership by Dr Farooq Sattar, sparking strong opposition from MQM members in London.

Slade also pointed out that MQM operates under duress from the Pakistani military establishment.

He highlighted errors and inconsistencies in the Property Court judge's ruling, particularly regarding the rights of MQM trustees to defend themselves.

Slade cited the Christina Miller Authority case to support this argument.

Justice Arnold agreed with Slade on this point.

Additionally, Slade clarified that Hussain had not actually resigned as accused, but had temporarily delegated authority to the Co-ordination Committee to normalise the situation within MQM.

He referenced the April 2016 constitution of MQM to emphasise decision-making procedures within the organization.

Slade also criticised Dr Sattar for creating chaos without involving the Co-ordination Committee in London.

In response, the claimant's lawyer, Barrister Nazar Muhammad, attributed Dr Sattar's actions to Hussain's strong statement on August 22, 2016.

The judge responded by stating that it is not legal to remove someone from their position against their will.

After considering arguments from both sides, the Court of Appeals announced that they have reserved judgment. Draft decisions will be issued to the lawyers before a final judgment is made.