Panama Papers Inquiry Bill: Ruckus in Senate panel over Panama inquiry

PPP bill referred to Senate chairman as opposition stages walkout .

ISLAMABAD: Federal lawmaker from the government and the opposition on Tuesday traded barbs, blaming each other for ‘shying away’ from accountability during a debate on the controversial Panama Papers Inquiry Bill 2016.

The bill – introduced by the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) in the Senate on Sept 26 after defeating the government in voting by a margin of 13 votes — seeks an inquiry into the Panama Papers, which in April revealed that three children of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had offshore companies.

The bill suggested forensic audit of the money sent abroad through secret channels besides binding all those whose names have appeared in the Panama Papers.



The Senate Standing Committee on Law and Justice took up the bill for discussion with the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz Senator Javed Abbasi in the chair.

However, at the very outset Abbasi asked PPP Senator Aitzaz Ahsan, the mover of the bill, why the opposition was pushing ahead with legislation when the same issue had already been taken up by the Supreme Court.

The top court on Nov 1 announced that a judicial commission would be formed to probe the Panamagate scandal and sought terms of reference (ToRs) from both the government and its arch rival Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).

Senator Ahsan, who is also leader of the opposition in the Senate, said they must go ahead with the bill and that “the government is running away from accountability”. Staring at Law Minister Zahid Hamid, Senator Ahsan kept repeating the statement throughout the meeting.

A visibly incensed Hamid remained silent but at one point said: “It is very sad that we have stooped to this level,” and that it was, in fact, “the opposition that is running away from accountability.”

The government members, including Chairperson Abbasi and Hamid as well as Nihal Hashmi, Ayesha Raza Farooq and Salim Zia, opposed the bill and suggested that since the case was in the apex court, it would be better to wait for its verdict.

Hamid said all the ToRs of the government and the opposition to probe into the Panamagate scandal had already been submitted with the apex court.

“The PTI has also submitted its bill which is word by word the same the opposition is presenting. The bill should therefore not be discussed right now as the matter is sub judice,” he added.

When Senator Ahsan started reading out the bill, Awami National Party Senator Shahi Syed suggested that accountability should be across the board and the bill should not be limited to Panama leaks.

Senator Ahsan replied that he was including this point in the bill and started scribbling it on the draft, loudly saying ‘Panama and others’. The leader of opposition kept amending the bill while loudly pronouncing the amendments.  This exasperated Ayesha and Hamid, who said amendments in a bill could not be done in such way.

“If you are amending it right during the meeting then take some time and come up with a ready bill,” Hamid suggested. He also cited rules of business about such legislation but both sides had their own interpretation of the rules.

Aitzaz said government was unwilling and insincere about the bill although the bill was not specifically hitting the prime minister.  “There is no mention of the PM in the bill but it has got on their nerves and they think the PM could be held accountable,” he said, adding: “The way government representatives are debating the bill shows how they are avoiding the discussion on the bill.”

“The accountability should be across the board and that is what the SC doing,” Hamid retorted.

Both sides kept bickering over the changes in the bill. The PPP said it was modification not amendment while the law minister said both the words carried the same meanings in legal language.

As the government seemed adamant, the chairperson suggested a voting as to whether the Senate’s chairman’s observation be sought about the glitch or not.

Four government lawmakers were for the proposal while four opposition members were against it. In this situation, the chairperson, used his vote and referred the case to Senate chairperson.

The decision created ruckus and opposition members left the room for a brief sit-in outside parliament, where they chanted slogans. Later, government and opposition lawmakers held separate press briefings and blamed each other for non-seriousness.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 9^th, 2016.age)