A first on multiple counts
In what is indisputably a landmark judgement, the Islamabad
High Court (IHC) has directed the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to
investigate General (retd) Pervez Musharraf for alleged corruption while he was
president. The IHC has thus redefined the power of NAB to investigate
ex-military men, especially retired generals. The verdict came in a petition
filed by Lieutenant Colonel (retd) Inamur Rahim in 2014 seeking a probe into
Musharraf’s alleged corruption. The IHC judgement has cleared the ambiguity in
the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999, based on which NAB had taken
the position that it did not have jurisdiction to proceed against retired army
officers despite receiving complaints of corruption against them. The
petitioner in Musharraf’s case had asked NAB to conduct an inquiry into the allegation
that the ex-General in his nomination paspers had declared assets beyond his
known sources of income. Further, quoting Musharraf’s book In the Line of Fire, the petitioner stated that the former military
ruler admitted to handing over a large number of people to the US in exchange
for payment. Also, that Musharraf had injected corruption into the senior
hierarchy of the armed forces by allotting them plots over and above their
entitlement under the extant rules. NAB in a letter dated April 25, 2013 argued
that Musharraf was immune from being proceeded against under the NAO as he was
a member of the armed forces. The court, however, found General (retd) Pervez
Musharraf fit to be proceeded against because he had held the constitutional
post of president and had retired from the armed forces. The IHC found NAB had
erred in interpreting the provisions of NAO 1999. Hence it declared NAB’s
refusal through the April 25, 2013 letter “illegal” and “issued without lawful
authority”. With this ruling, the IHC has laid down the principle that
everyone, including retired military officials, can be tried under the NAO if
found prima facie to have been involved in corruption. The court refused to
hear Musharraf’s counsel since the general had already been declared a
proclaimed offender who had run away abroad from the cases against him on
dubious medical grounds.
While the IHC verdict relies on a close interpretation of
the provisions of the NAO, it marks a first on multiple counts. So far,
Musharraf had been indicted in a number of cases with treason, murder, etc, but
corruption had not figured in the charge sheet against him till now. Even after
retirement, very few ex-COASs have been held accountable for their sins of
omission or commission in our history. There have been exceptions when a
handful of senior armed forces officials faced NAB cases. Notable amongst them
are Admiral (retd) Mansurul Haq (a former chief of naval staff), Major General
(retd) Khalid Zahir Akhtar and Lieutenant-General (retd) Muhammad Afzal
Muzaffar. Haq’s case ended in a $ 7.5 million plea bargain, while the latter
two were found guilty in the National Logistics Cell (NLC) scam. But the weight
of the track record in this regard is heavily tilted in favour of top military
commanders and their families. It is by now part of urban legend that the
families of Field Marshal Ayub Khan, General Ziaul Haq and Akhtar Abdur Rehman
emerged from their family heads’ stints in power immensely wealthier. None of
the above were ever put in the dock on this or any other more serious charge such
as treason for abrogating the constitution, amongst other possible grounds for prosecution
(General Yahya Khan was only declared a usurper years after he had presided
over half the country being torn away). It has taken our justice system decades
to firmly grasp this nettle in the case of Musharraf. Let us hope this does not
prove a flash in the pan and provides the bedrock for holding the high, mighty
and powerful to account, irrespective of the uniform they besmirched or the
high office they enjoyed.
No comments:
Post a Comment