ISLAMABAD: The process of introducing ‘more effective’ accountability laws in the country is at a standstill as the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) has submitted its objections to the proposed National Accountability Commission (NAC) but remained silent on the issue of bringing generals and judges under the commission’s purview.

At the last meeting of the Parliamentary Committee on Accountability Laws, the PTI took a sudden U-turn by rejecting the draft NAC bill that had almost been finalised in previous 12 meetings of the committee. The PTI rejected the bill when the committee agreed to bring generals and judges under NAC laws.

Interestingly, the PTI on Tuesday submitted a document containing eight objections at the committee’s 14th meeting held at Parliament House, but remained silent on the issue of accountability of generals and judges.

“We have given our objections in writing and we have been asked by the committee head that these will be discussed at the next meeting,” PTI leader Dr Shireen Mazari, who recently replaced her party’s vice chairman Shah Mehmood Qureshi in the parliamentary committee, told reporters after the in-camera meeting.

Party is silent on issue of bringing generals, judges under purview of anti-graft watchdog

The NAC bill is being prepared to repeal the controversial National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 introduced by former military dictator retired Gen Pervez Musharraf.

Talking to reporters after the meeting, committee chairman Law Minister Zahid Hamid said the committee would discuss the PTI objections at its next meeting on Oct 24.

The PTI objections document said: “PTI is rejecting the NAC Bill, repeal of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 (NAO), and the effect of the foregoing on the accountability process of public office-holders in Pakistan. PTI will also be submitting its amendments to the NAO 1999 to strengthen accountability further. A major reason for the failure of the NAO so far has been a result of a failure to operationalise the law and its provisions effectively.”

The PTI said the NAC bill revealed that it did not introduce a single measure of reform that would improve the current accountability process or bring corrupt elements to task. “There appears to be no justification for the enactment of completely new law, particularly so when the timing itself suggests bad faith on the part of the government,” it said.

One of the objections said that unlike the NAO, which specifically stated in section 2 that “it shall come into force at once and shall be deemed to have come into force from the first day of January 1985”, the NAC bill’s section 1(3) simply stated that “it shall come into force at once and shall apply to all persons who are or have been holders of public office in the past”.

“By removing the specific time frame of section 2 of the NAO, the new bill brings a biased subjectivity and opens the door for political considerations overriding an unbiased approach towards accountability to arrest corruption,” it said.

The PTI said chapter-III of the NAC bill provided for the creation of an independent accountability investigation agency. “The purported purpose of this appears to be to create separation between the investigation and prosecution powers of the commission. This so-called separation is both illusory and illogical. Furthermore, the agency or any of its officers does not even have powers to arrest any person approval of the chairman of the commission (or a court). The commission also controls the prosecution by appointment of the chief prosecutor and other prosecutors, hence the apparent separation of these two roles is misleading and illusory and these two functions essentially vest in the same commission,” it said.

One of the objections said: “Under section 10 of the NAO, a person found guilty of the offence of corruption and corrupt practices is to be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to 14 years and with fine and such of the assets and pecuniary resources of such holder of public office or person, as are found to be disproportionate to the known sources of his income or which are acquired from money obtained through corruption and corrupt practices shall be forfeited.

“Effectively, the punishment under the NAO for corruption is a maximum term of 14 years in prison and all of the convict’s illegal gains are forfeited. Under the NAC bill, by introduction of section 19(1) the maximum punishment for corruption remains 14 years of rigorous imprisonment but where all of the illegal gain fully recovered the maximum punishment for the offender is reduced to seven years.”

Published in Dawn, October 18th, 2017