IF the process of accountability and transparency is to be meaningful in any way, the first step is applying the notion across the board wherever it is required. The federal cabinet took a step in the right direction when on Wednesday it agreed to amend the 1964 Promotion and Service Rules to make it mandatory for everyone drawing remunerations from the public exchequer to make public the details of their assets. This would apply to civil servants as well as members of the judiciary and the armed forces. Information Minister Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan told a news conference that “While details of assets of parliamentarians are filed and published every year, the government has supported a private member's bill to publish assets … so that the process of accountability is across the board …” The proposal has been forwarded to the relevant parliamentary committee.

The decision has drawn some criticism on the grounds that it may be linked to what is being perceived as the current 'confrontation' between the elected government and other arms of the state. While such a motive would be highly unsavoury, the move itself ought to be welcomed. There is no reason why, in the interests of transparency, those whose salaries are funded by taxpayers' money should not be required to make public details of their assets — declarations that could be used to discourage corrupt or unethical practices.

It is here, however, that the difficulty lies. It is worth asking at this juncture how the country has benefited in any meaningful way from other, similar, efforts towards accountability. Take the requirement that parliamentarians must make public the details of their assets. Such declarations are made routinely and while they frequently draw media attention for appearing to be misrepresentative, there are few — if any — cases in which anyone has been investigated on the suspicion of having submitted a falsified declaration. The lack of such follow-up renders the declaration requirement meaningless. Further, there is a need to close loopholes that allow the issuance of misleading declarations — ones that reflect the assets of just the individual, for example, as opposed to providing a fuller picture of their wealth and income. Ultimately, there is no getting away from the fact that for any such moves to bear fruit, there is a need to link up asset declarations with the payment of taxes, in itself an issue that requires long-overdue reform. Only from this starting point can begin the process of gauging the true wealth of public figures and ensuring that the public exchequer is not defrauded in any way.