Accountability laws set for bipartisan review

Minister for Law Dr Farogh Naseem says no proposal to hold generals and judges accountable

ISLAMABAD: Representatives of the government and the opposition are again going to meet on Wednesday on a proposal to review the accountability laws for making the process transparent.

However, Minister for Law Dr Farogh Naseem while talking to The Express Tribune confirmed that there was no proposal from the opposition nor the federal government to expand the jurisdiction of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to hold generals and judges accountable.

In November 2017, all political parties had evolved consensus that generals and judges would not come under the purview of accountability laws. Even the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) withdrew its member Farhatullah Babar's proposal to hold them accountable.

However, a senior PPP member still claims that the party has again raised the issue for across-the-board accountability, but the federal government is completely unwilling to accept the PPP’s proposal.

It is learnt that discussion is going on with opposition parties to change the NAB laws and a meeting will be held on Wednesday in this regard.

Both sides agreed to amend laws in view of the proposals given by the Supreme Court last month.

The Supreme Court proposed two amendments to the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), 1999 that governs operations of the top anti-graft watchdog.

“In the changed scenario the legislature may consider amending the NAO appropriately so as to enable an accused person to apply for his bail before the relevant accountability court in the first instance.

“It is also recommended that the unrealistic timeframe for conclusion of a trial specified in Section 16(a) of the NAO, 1999 may also be reconsidered and revisited by the legislature,” says a 22-page verdict authored by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, who was part of a larger bench to decide the bail appeal of Tallat Ishaq, an office superintendent at the Director Development, Quetta Division.

The judgement says the original intent behind introduction of Section 9(b) of the NAO, 1999 ousting jurisdiction of the courts regarding grant of bail in a case under the said ordinance already stands neutralised by opening of the door for bail through a high court.

“Apart from that the high courts and this court have always felt difficulty in adjusting the requirements of ‘without lawful authority’ and ‘of no legal effect’ relevant to a writ of certiorari (Article 199(1)(a)(ii) of the Constitution) with the requirements of bail provided in section 497, CrPC.”

Apart from both these proposals, both sides are considering to end the option of 90 days remand of accused persons during investigation.

Likewise, it is also being considered that the authority regarding the arrest of accused persons should be vested with the accountability court. Earlier, same authority was exercised by the NAB chairman.

Sources also revealed that a proposal is also under discussion to completely bar NAB from releasing information related the offence of the accused during investigation. According to the proposal, concerned officials should face penal consequences over releasing information which may damage the reputation of the accused persons.