Increasingly
controversial NAB
Disquiet is
growing against the National Accountability Bureau’s (NAB’s) shenanigans. This
has by now reached the highest judicial forum, the Supreme Court (SC). A
three-member bench of the SC has asked why NAB is becoming ‘politicised’,
practicing ‘double standards’, indulging in discriminatory conduct in different
cases, and resorting at the drop of a hat to plea bargains even in cases that
do not merit it. Justice Qazi Faez Isa remarked during the hearing of a bail
application of a section officer of the Sindh information Department why NAB’s
policy in investigating corruption cases is not uniform, as in some cases it is
putting in all its efforts but in some other cases not doing enough. Justice
Isa noted that billions of rupees were recovered from the residence of Mushtaq
Ahmed Raisani, the then finance secretary Balochistan, but NAB struck a plea
bargain deal with him and in fact managed to get him bail from the trial court
despite the SC having denied him bail two months earlier. Justice Isa went on
to argue that NAB should set a uniform principle for dealing with corruption
cases instead of dealing with every case according to its discretion. Head of
the bench Justice Gulzar Ahmed said NAB had shown no performance except
allowing plea bargains to accused persons. The honourable Justice asked a
senior NAB official to point out any case in which it had actually recovered
any amount. Justice Gulzar pointed out that billions of rupees had been spent
on NAB but nobody knew the fate of corruption cases. NAB, Justice Gulzar
concluded, is only creating anguish and misery for everyone. In the instant
case being heard, the NAB Additional Prosecutor General could not name the
prosecutor except to say he was from Karachi. This case is not the first time
the SC has taken umbrage at NAB’s conduct. Last month, Chief Justice of
Pakistan (CJP) Mian Saqib Nisar noted NAB was creating lacunae in cases, which
resulted in acquittal of the accused. The CJP had also expressed anger at the
misbehaviour of NAB investigation officers during interrogation of the accused.
The SC has
echoed the criticism being heaped on NAB’s head from more than one direction,
as well as from the public. Actually, it needs perhaps to be remembered that
NAB was set up by former military dictator Pervez Musharraf, essentially to
‘nab’ politicians. Musharraf may be long gone, but his creature still stalks
the land. The criticisms highlighted by the SC regarding the arbitrariness of
approach, discriminatory treatment in similar cases, presumption of guilt of
the accused (which flies in the face of the old established jurisprudential
principle of ‘innocent until proved guilty’), mistreatment of the accused (e.g.
presenting those arrested before the media, parading retired professors and the
former Vice Chancellor of Punjab University in handcuffs), and NAB’s penchant
for striking plea bargain deals at its discretion have been around for quite
some time. However, they seem to be getting worse, given the climate attending
the PTI government’s anti-corruption crusade. Criticism has also been levelled
at the chairman NAB’s seemingly unchecked discretionary powers, in the light of
which any deviation from the norm of conducting corruption investigations leads
to charges of a political witch-hunt. The need therefore presents itself
logically of reframing NAB’s mandate in a manner that eliminates arbitrariness,
restores due process and the rights of the accused enshrined in our laws and
constitution, and creates a mechanism to provide checks on the chairman’s and
NAB’s discretion. It is in the interests of the government for NAB not only to
be carrying out but being seen to be carrying out its mandate in a transparent,
regulated by law manner. Otherwise the charges of political motivation behind
many of NAB’s actions may eventually rebound on the government itself, making
it harder for it to maintain its professed impartiality in the anti-corruption
campaign.
No comments:
Post a Comment