THE Public Accounts Committee is a central plank of parliamentary oversight of the executive; an effective and empowered PAC can nudge governance in the right direction and also help stamp out corruption. But practice has not lived up to potential so far, and few would argue that the PAC has been an effective parliamentary committee. Yet, in the PTI federal government’s misguided quest to deny Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Shahbaz Sharif the PAC chairmanship, the rulers may inflict more harm on the committee and the overall functioning of parliament than they recognise. It is still not too late to change course. The thrust of the PTI argument for refusing to give Mr Sharif the chairmanship of the PAC is that, at least initially, the committee will be auditing accounts from the PML-N’s last term — therefore, the PML-N should not judge its own performance. Against the PTI’s arguments are several factors, especially the parliamentary norm that the leader of the opposition be offered the committee’s chairmanship. Even assuming that Mr Sharif will act in a partisan manner as PAC chairman, would it really be easy for him to sweep the PML-N’s alleged corruption under the rug?

The PAC is an important parliamentary cog, but it is by no means the only forum in which the government can pursue corruption allegations against the PML-N or other opposition parties. Moreover, if Mr Sharif were to try and overrule the objections of the PTI members of the PAC, it is unlikely that the matter would die right there. The PTI could quickly take matters to the court of public opinion, and from there any number of investigatory or judicial bodies could leap into the fray. What is also unusual is that the PTI is putting forward its own recommendation for the PAC chairmanship — a PTI MNA rather than a neutral figure. Surely, if the PTI is arguing that PML-N leadership of the PAC would result in a cover-up, the opposition can argue that the PTI leadership of the PAC will result in a witch hunt. Part of the problem is the unnecessary delay in the work of the PAC; if the PAC were up to date, it would not today have to examine accounts from several years ago. Whatever the case, parliamentary norms should be respected, and not violated.

Published in Dawn, October 31st, 2018