The Supreme Court of Pakistan (SCP) on Monday asked the federal government to explain whether the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and the Federal Investigation Agency's (FIA) Anti-Corruption Wing share the same powers or not.
Justice Shaikh Azmat Saeed, part of the two-member bench hearing the case, said "NAB is facilitating corruption in the country" by allowing wrongdoers to opt for NAB's voluntary return scheme.
Earlier in October 2016, the apex court took suo moto notice and barred NAB from accepting offers of voluntary return on ill-gotten money by a wrongdoer under the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999.
It later issued notices to the Attorney General of Pakistan and the advocates general of the four provinces, among others, to explain why, as per NAB's remarks, "the provincial and federal governments did not take action against those who benefitted from the voluntary return and plea bargain schemes under the NAB law".
SC in conversation with NAB, federal govt
Justice Saeed wondered why a person accused of corruption worth Rs2.5 billion gets away with it by opting for NAB's voluntary return scheme, while someone who commits corruption of a much lower amount is condemned to serving time in jail.
Justice Amir Hani Muslim, who headed the bench, too reprimanded NAB for taking undue advantage of the voluntary return provision and said "even if a court approves it, the decision should be challenged".
The counsel for NAB, however, regretted that even though NAB had tackled someone involved in a corruption case worth Rs40 billion, the media "blew [the plea bargain deal] out of proportion".
"The budget of the entire Balochistan province was not worth Rs40 billion," the counsel noted.
Justice Saeed went on to say that NAB basically advertises in newspapers, telling people involved in corruption that they can "get away with it" by opting for voluntary return. "NAB is facilitating corruption in the country."
The counsel for NAB, replying to the criticism, said that the accountability bureau itself did not devise the provision of voluntary return.
The attorney general, speaking on behalf of the federal government, told the court that a committee headed by the federal law minister is investigating the provision of voluntary return under NAO.
He further said that NAB wrote letters addressing electricity defaulters.
To which, Justice Hani remarked that with the speed the things are moving, it seems that it will take at least a year to get the work done.
The counsel for NAB then apprised the court that the government had asked the bureau to address power defaulters and recover the dues.
To which, Justice Saeed inquired according to what law had the government wrote to NAB. "Is NAB a recovery officer?"
He further said that people who opt for voluntary return essentially confess to the crime. "Then how can such a government official [who admits to the corruption charges brought against them] remain in office?"
Justice Saeed was of the view that NAB should address its issues with media outside the court.
The hearing was adjourned for two weeks and a three-member bench will be hearing the case from now.
Federal Law Minister Zahid Hamid, while speaking before a Senate's standing committee on Monday, said the government is in the process to form a committee comprising parliamentarians tasked with reviewing the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Ordinance, keeping in view the growing criticism regarding plea bargain and voluntary return.
The law minister said this during the meeting of Senate's Standing Committee on Law and Justice, after the committee members, following intense deliberations, recommended that the NAB Ordinance of 1999 should be reviewed.
The Senate body meeting was chaired by Senator Javed Abbasi.
The committee members had a detailed discussion on Section 25 of the NAB law that deals with voluntary return and plea bargain.
NAB Deputy Chairman Imtiaz Tajwar, DG Operations Zahir Shah and other officials defended NAB’s powers — particularly the provision of voluntary return and plea bargain.
PPP Senator Farhatullah Babar said there was a strong perception that NAB was promoting corruption rather eradicating the menace. He questioned the powers of NAB chairman to accept voluntary return and plea bargain and said "he [NAB chief] accepted the plea bargain from Balochistan’s former finance secretary to 'protect' big guns".
The NAB deputy chairman, however, defended the move. Reiterating the support, he apprised the committee that the bureau has recovered Rs37.1 billion in plea bargain and voluntary return since 2010.
Minister for Law Zahid Hamid said a parliamentary committee would soon be constituted to review the NAB law as a whole and that members of the National Assembly as well as the Senate will be part of the committee.
Hamid further said the Senate chairman has already filed nominations to the National Assembly speaker in this regard.
“The government has also forwarded names from treasury benches to the speaker… instead of five names, Opposition Leader Khursheed Shah has forwarded six names so we have been requesting him to drop one name,” he added.
In addition, Hamid said that the federal government strongly feels there was a need to review NAB ordinance and that the parliamentary committee will work on it.
Hamid and Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Senator Aitzaz Ahsan had a heated exchange of words when the PPP leader inquired why NAB did not "interrogate" Maryam Nawaz and Hussain Nawaz, children of the prime minister accused of corruption in Panama leaks.
In his response, the federal law minister expressed frustration, accusing the PPP senator of raising "unnecessary" questions to manipulate the media.
The standing committee also had to review the Pakistan Commissions of Inquiry Bill, 2016. However, Ahsan protested, saying the bill was put on the meeting’s agenda on a one-day notice. Therefore, the discussion on the agenda item was deferred.
