ISLAMABAD: The Senate Standing Committee on Law, Justice and Human Rights rejected on Wednesday a constitutional amendment bill seeking an end to constitutional indemnity available to the president and governors in proceedings against them in criminal cases after its opposition by PPP and PML-N members.

The chairman of the committee, Mohammad Javed Abbasi, had to go for a vote count to decide about the fate of the private bill that had been moved by Hafiz Hamdullah of the JUI-F when the mover refused to withdraw it after its opposition by PPP’s Saeed Ghani and PML-N’s Ayesha Farooq.

The bill had been tabled by Mr Hamdullah in March. The JUI-F senator had sought omission of clause 2 of Article 248, which states: “No criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be instituted or continue against the president or a governor in any court during the term of office.”

Saeed Ghani and Ayesha Farooq were the only two members, out of 12, who attended the meeting. Since Mr Hamdullah is not a member of the committee, he could not cast his own vote in favour of the bill.

The mover termed this provision in the constitution against the Quran and Sunnah, saying it also negates the constitutional provision which grants equal rights to every citizen.

Interestingly, Federal Law Secretary Mohammad Raza Khan also indirectly supported the bill, saying the indemnity given to the president, prime minister, ministers and governors through Article 248 was against the basic principles of Islam.

PPP and PML-N members reject bill seeking end to indemnity

The law secretary suggested to Mr Hamdullah to withdraw his bill and asked him to move another bill seeking abolition of the whole Article 248.

The committee chairman, who belongs to PML-N, observed that the amendment bill, if approved, would open a Pandora’s box. He said such indemnity was available in other countries as well.

Mr Ghani said the JUI-F’s former head late Mufti Mehmood had also signed the Constitution of 1973 which granted this indemnity to the offices and not to individuals.

Ayesha Farooq said that no one was above the law and constitution. She said if the president or governors would be appearing before courts, they would not be able to perform their constitutional duties.

The opponents of the bill were of the view that the indemnity had been given to the offices only for a limited period and the president or governors would have to face courts after retiring from their offices.

Meanwhile, the committee directed the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) to present before it complete details of corruption cases being pursued by them in various courts of law.

The committee also decided to call NAB Chairman Chaudhry Qamar Zaman to appear before the committee with details of the cases NAB had filed in courts, decisions on them and recovery made so far from the corrupt people.

The directives were issued by the committee during a discussion on the steps being taken by the government to check corruption in federal institutions.

The law secretary briefed the committee about the steps being taken by the government through the NAB and FIA to curb the menace of corruption from government departments. He informed the committee that the draft of a new law to provide protection to complainants in corruption cases had been prepared and it had been sent to the prime minister and the federal cabinet for approval.

Senior FIA official Maqsoodul Hassan told the committee that there were differences between the NAB and FIA on certain issues. He said 94 FIA officers had been punished through a recently-established internal accountability unit. He said more than 70 cases had been registered against various people in connection with cyber crimes and for manufacturing spurious drugs.

In reply to various questions of the members, the NAB’s legal adviser told the committee that in the larger interest of the public, the bureau could hold inquiry into the matters under investigations of FIA.

Hafiz Hamdullah criticised the performance of NAB, terming it an institution which was being used to malign politicians. He alleged that those who had looted billions of rupees from the national exchequer had been released after paying only a few million rupees. He alleged the NAB had become a “kidnapping for ransom institution”. He asked if the NAB had filed cases against any army general.

The committee members expressed reservations over a move to grant degree-awarding status to the Federal Judicial Academy.

While reviewing the Federal Judicial Academy (Amendment) Ordinance, 2014, introduced by Law Minister Pervaiz Rashid in the Senate on April 23 last year, the committee decided to hold more consultations on the draft.

Published in Dawn, July 2nd, 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play